Thursday, December 10, 2009
ClimateGate: In the Mainstream Media...
The WSJ takes a very level-headed look at ClimateGate's impact on Copenhagen. Steve McIntyre is presented in a way that I believe he himself would approve of...
ClimateGate: So Easy a Sixth Grader Can Do It!
This is a very clear demonstration of one of the fundamental issues that the AGW skeptics have long had with the supporting data: the temperature data appears to be “contaminated” with urban heat island effect. Watch this kid (and his dad) demonstrate it, using the GISS' own data:
Sarah Palin on Copenhagen...
A politician talking something that sounds like sense to my ears:
From Sarah Palin's Facebook...
But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can’t say with assurance that man’s activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real.How refreshing!
From Sarah Palin's Facebook...
Congress Focuses on the Important Things...
I'm pretty sure the average American thinks that there are some fairly important issues before Congress. I'd kinda like to think that our congresscritters were working on these issues.
Then my common sense kicks in, and I realize that most likely they are beclowning themselves somehow.
Good grief!
Then my common sense kicks in, and I realize that most likely they are beclowning themselves somehow.
Good grief!
ClimateGate: the Sounds of a Monolithic Front Breaking Up...
Maclean's is a Canadian magazine and web presence, a little hard to characterize but their politics are not the usual unrelieved liberality we associate with Canada. They are running a reader survey that asks: “Is Canada shirking its international obligations when it comes to climate change?”The results as of this writing are shown at right (click on the image to enlarge). See the current results yourself here.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Jamulian Weather...
By popular request, here are the graphs showing the wind, barometric pressure, and rainfall from Monday's storm...
ClimateGate: Looking Closely at the Data...
Willis Eschenbach has been doing exactly that, this time at the Australian temperature data series used in the IPCC report. Step by step, he picks apart the differences between the raw data and the “fudged” data discussed in the CRU emails. He finds:
Yikes again, double yikes! What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on. They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They’ve just added a huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right … but a six degree per century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to heaven? What’s up with that?Go read the whole thing...
Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style … they are indisputable evidence that the “homogenized” data has been changed to fit someone’s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.
One thing is clear from this. People who say that “Climategate was only about scientists behaving badly, but the data is OK” are wrong. At least one part of the data is bad, too. The Smoking Gun for that statement is at Darwin Zero.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
ClimateGate: Mainstream Media Takes Note...
The conclusion of an editorial in Canada's National Post:
Except now we’re told that CRU disposed of the raw data some 20 years ago after it was manufactured into “homogenized” and “value added data.” The manufacturer 20 years ago? Another Climategate star, Tom Wigley, who was then the head of CRU.The National Post has heretofore been a consistently credulous AGW supporter. Read the whole thing here.
But what of Phil Jones’s argument, that the Hadley and CRU datasets are nothing special. “Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for NASA and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others,” he says. “Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves.”
The answer to Phil Jones comes from the Hadley Centre itself, through another fact that speaks for itself. “The datasets are largely based on the same raw data,” the FAQ page at the Hadley Centre website states, in explaining that NASA, the National Climate Data Center and Hadley-CRU all use the same data. The different results these organizations sometimes obtain, it elaborates, stems not from the data but from its absence — where the data is poor or non-existent, the different agencies employ different types of guesswork.
There is no unimpeachable raw data in which we can have confidence. There is a large cast of impeachable characters in the Climategate drama with an evident appetite for cooking the books.
And there are but two honest options for our governments to now employ. They can choose to redo the studies, with data, scientists, and a peer-review process that can be trusted. Or they can recognize that the IPCC process has been politicized from the start, and that the prima facie evidence for dangerous global warming does not meet the threshold required to prolong the scientific sham of the generation.
Jamulian Weather...
We had a terrific storm yesterday, truly violent weather by local standards. What does that mean? Well, we had nearly 3 inches (75mm) of rain, strong gusty winds that peaked at over 20 mph (32 kph), and the temperature got down into the 30s F (near 0 C).
Our power was knocked out at 4 pm yesterday, and didn't come back on for 9 hours (1 am this morning). As I drove out of Lawson Valley and through Jamul, I saw that the power was out for long stretches until I got to Rancho San Diego. I passed a fleet of SDG&E (the local electric company) trucks along state 94. Going through the intersection of state 94 and Steele Canyon Road was kind of eerie – all the bright lights there at the 7-11, Cafe Bravo, etc. were out, and the traffic signal was completely out.
Then when I pulled into the parking lot at work (in Solana Beach), when I opened my door the wind ripped the door out of my hands and slammed it open. I thought it had broken, but so far as I can tell it's ok.
Driving in, I heard on the radio that yesterday there were 476 accidents recorded, presumably mostly related to the rain and wind. I also heard that over 100,000 people were without power at some point during the storm, and at that hour (around 2 am) there were still 10,000 people without power (and I was driving through one such area as I heard that report).
That's violent weather to us!
Our power was knocked out at 4 pm yesterday, and didn't come back on for 9 hours (1 am this morning). As I drove out of Lawson Valley and through Jamul, I saw that the power was out for long stretches until I got to Rancho San Diego. I passed a fleet of SDG&E (the local electric company) trucks along state 94. Going through the intersection of state 94 and Steele Canyon Road was kind of eerie – all the bright lights there at the 7-11, Cafe Bravo, etc. were out, and the traffic signal was completely out.
Then when I pulled into the parking lot at work (in Solana Beach), when I opened my door the wind ripped the door out of my hands and slammed it open. I thought it had broken, but so far as I can tell it's ok.
Driving in, I heard on the radio that yesterday there were 476 accidents recorded, presumably mostly related to the rain and wind. I also heard that over 100,000 people were without power at some point during the storm, and at that hour (around 2 am) there were still 10,000 people without power (and I was driving through one such area as I heard that report).
That's violent weather to us!
ClimateGate: People Start Wondering...
It is just wonderful to see questions being asked about the data supporting the AGW argument by folks who haven't been part of the AGW skeptical crowd in the past. I take this as a sign of an awakening of sorts, and a very welcome one at that...
J. Storrs Hall has a terrific example of this, wherein he looks at just one of the temperature data sources (ice cores) and demonstrates the importance of perspective – and the perils of carefully selected data (as the CRU folks did). You really need to read it from the top down; don't jump around or you'll miss the impact...
J. Storrs Hall has a terrific example of this, wherein he looks at just one of the temperature data sources (ice cores) and demonstrates the importance of perspective – and the perils of carefully selected data (as the CRU folks did). You really need to read it from the top down; don't jump around or you'll miss the impact...
AGW Debate Graphic...
David McCandless, posting at information is Beautiful, has an interesting graphical summary of the AGW debate (skeptics vs. proponents).
Monday, December 7, 2009
Encouraging Words from Afghanistan...
Just received email from Michael Yon, who's reporting from Afghanistan. For years he's been very pessimistic about the progress of the war in Afghanistan, and very critical of the prosecution of the war there.Today he posts some very different impressions. He's feeling downright optimistic now that Obama has committed to the surge.
In my own experience, Yon is the most competent, sober, and best-informed source of information on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Reading his words today, I'm feeling very relieved. I sure hope he's right (again)...
ClimateGate: East Anglia University Statement...
Here's the updated statement from East Anglia University (home of the CRU). Most of it is defensive, of course. There are several explicit denials about the significance of anything revealed in the ClimateGate trove.
But most interesting to me are the two graphs at the bottom of the page. The top graph is the famous “hockey stick” graph, showing precipitous rises in measured and modeled temperatures. This is the graph that was published in the IPCC reports, and has been used very widely by AGW promoters. The bottom graph is the same data, but “uncorrected”. In other words, the raw data with no fudge factors and no tricks.
Those two graphs tell one of the essential revelations of ClimateGate, and here, for the very first time, the CRU is 'fessing up.
I suspect we'll be seeing more like this.
But most interesting to me are the two graphs at the bottom of the page. The top graph is the famous “hockey stick” graph, showing precipitous rises in measured and modeled temperatures. This is the graph that was published in the IPCC reports, and has been used very widely by AGW promoters. The bottom graph is the same data, but “uncorrected”. In other words, the raw data with no fudge factors and no tricks.
Those two graphs tell one of the essential revelations of ClimateGate, and here, for the very first time, the CRU is 'fessing up.
I suspect we'll be seeing more like this.
ClimateGate: The Role of Bloggers and the Web...
Interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal today...
A Day That Shall Live in Infamy...
Sixty-eight years ago today, Imperial Japan attacked the U.S. at Pearl Harbor. Until 9/11, this event was unrivaled as the most horrible unprovoked attack the U.S. had ever suffered. A few Pearl Harbor survivors are still alive, and some are planning to visit the site today. Here in California, we have special license plates to honor Pearl Harbor survivors – and I still see them driving around occasionally.
Just once, several years ago, I actually had the chance to meet and talk with one of these Pearl Harbor survivors, as we both climbed out of our cars in a grocery store parking lot. The fellow I met was 17 years old at the time of the attack, and was a “plane wrangler” at one of the air bases. His job was to move the fighter planes from hangers to the flight line and vice versa. He could do little on that day except to hide from the attacking Japanese planes, and to help clean up afterwards.
Today I read that historians believe they have found the missing fifth Japanese mini-sub – and that they have evidence that it actually participated in the attack (unlike the other four). If this is proven, a little re-writing of history will be required...
While 9/11 looms much larger in my mind these days, the Pearl Harbor attack still holds many lessons for us. I've read extensively on World War II in general, and the Pacific theatre in particular, and yet still every time I read a new book I run into new information. The most useful things, I think, are the illustrations about how people actually behave under extreme circumstances. Our society rests in large part on assumptions about good behavior by people all over the world – and Pearl Harbor teaches us that it ain't necessarily so. The whole period has been so thoroughly mined by historians that one can quite easily get an understanding about how and why both sides acted the way they did. This is not yet possible with 9/11.
Anyway, take a few moments today to reflect on the meaning of the Pearl Harbor attack. If you have the opportunity, by all means do your bit to honor those who served there – both those who died, and those who survived...
Just once, several years ago, I actually had the chance to meet and talk with one of these Pearl Harbor survivors, as we both climbed out of our cars in a grocery store parking lot. The fellow I met was 17 years old at the time of the attack, and was a “plane wrangler” at one of the air bases. His job was to move the fighter planes from hangers to the flight line and vice versa. He could do little on that day except to hide from the attacking Japanese planes, and to help clean up afterwards.
Today I read that historians believe they have found the missing fifth Japanese mini-sub – and that they have evidence that it actually participated in the attack (unlike the other four). If this is proven, a little re-writing of history will be required...
While 9/11 looms much larger in my mind these days, the Pearl Harbor attack still holds many lessons for us. I've read extensively on World War II in general, and the Pacific theatre in particular, and yet still every time I read a new book I run into new information. The most useful things, I think, are the illustrations about how people actually behave under extreme circumstances. Our society rests in large part on assumptions about good behavior by people all over the world – and Pearl Harbor teaches us that it ain't necessarily so. The whole period has been so thoroughly mined by historians that one can quite easily get an understanding about how and why both sides acted the way they did. This is not yet possible with 9/11.
Anyway, take a few moments today to reflect on the meaning of the Pearl Harbor attack. If you have the opportunity, by all means do your bit to honor those who served there – both those who died, and those who survived...
ClimateGate: So Much for Ignoring It at Copenhagen...
AGW supporters have been trying very hard to pretend ClimateGate never happened, and that even if it did, it doesn't matter. The science is settled, dammit!
Oops.
Oops.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)