Sunday, August 12, 2007
Climate Audit Is DOWN
If you go to NASA's Web site and look at the "U.S. surface air temperature" rankings for the lower 48 states, you might notice that something has changed.I've written about McIntyre and Climate Audit before, but the distressing thing is that Climate Audit is down. Has Steyn, that reichwing thug, overwhelmed the site's bandwidth allotment? Or have an army of righteous fanatics launched a denial of service attack to punish treason? In the meantime, the juxtaposition of the Newsweek screed on global warming and Steyn should give anyone with a sense of humor a chuckle to start off Monday morning.
Then again, you might not. They're not issuing any press releases about it. But they have quietly revised their All-Time Hit Parade for U.S. temperatures. The "hottest year on record" is no longer 1998, but 1934. Another alleged swelterer, the year 2001, has now dropped out of the Top 10 altogether, and most of the rest of the 21st century – 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 – plummeted even lower down the Hot 100. In fact, every supposedly hot year from the Nineties and this decade has had its temperature rating reduced. Four of America's Top 10 hottest years turn out to be from the 1930s, that notorious decade when we all drove around in huge SUVs with the air-conditioning on full-blast.
So why is 1998 no longer America's record-breaker? Because a very diligent fellow named Steve McIntyre of climateaudit.com labored long and hard to prove there was a bug in NASA's handling of the raw data. He then notified the scientists responsible and received an acknowledgment that the mistake was an "oversight" that would be corrected in the next "data refresh."
Recently I had a conversation with a physicist who compared the "climate science" data and integrity problems unearthed recently with the Star Wars brouhaha of the 80s. According to him, at the universities everyone insisted that the missile defense system couldn't work. However, he said it was a remarkable that no one could give an explanation of why it couldn't work, therefore he reserved judgment.
If you think those who have long challenged the mainstream scientific findings about global warming recognize that the game is over, think again. Yes, 19 million people watched the "Live Earth" concerts last month, titans of corporate America are calling for laws mandating greenhouse cuts, "green" magazines fill newsstands, and the film based on Al Gore's best-selling book, "An Inconvenient Truth," won an Oscar.And just what does all that have to do with science? A physicist I know wants to know, and he finds himself unable to follow the logic, and highly perturbed about the "proof". (Not this physicist - the physicist I am talking about doesn't blog.)
Although the figure is less than in earlier polls, 39 percent of those asked say there is "a lot of disagreement among climate scientists" on the basic question of whether the planet is warming; 42 percent say there is a lot of disagreement that human activities are a major cause of global warming. Only 46 percent say the greenhouse effect is being felt today.Newsweek refers to this as the "undermining of science". Oddly, many scientists don't agree, and at least one thinks that scientists are as subject to social pressure as non-scientists. However, here's an encouraging thought: Apparently John Q. Public has a better grasp of the data than the climate scientists.
I'm old enough to remember when the major press outlets were breathless about the impending ice age. My great fear is that I will have to live through two Ice Ages and one runaway Global Warming in my one human life. I feel that this is unfair given everything else I have endured. The blueberries are immune (as scientists are not) to social factors, and they tell me that it is getting colder.
Blueberries or climate scientists, blueberries or climate scientists..... BLUEBERRIES! Every time!
PS: Lubos is an excellent read. I think his post on arctic ice may put him in danger of treason charges among climate scientists, but most non-climate scientists will really enjoy this one. There is even video.
PPS: Lubos on the housing crisis (with a link to a physicist's identification and prediction).
It's too bad that P.G. Wodehouse is no longer alive, because he would have great fun with this.
The warming trend hasn't changed?
There was no global warming trend before the US temperatures were lowered.
Do you think that RealClimateLies will explain that?
Links to this post: