Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
carbon offset / trading greenhouse kyoto climate model Inconvenient Truth bio fuel ipcc Glacier

RealClimate comment spiking

Before I beat up on RealClimate, I want to make sure that you understand that nearly every blog administrator must delete some comments. It is a sad fact that the more popular the blog, the more spammers will use the forum as a way to advertise products and services that most respectable individuals do not care to read about. If you thought your email was filled with “adult” offers, start a blog and you will be amazed at the adult traffic! Most of us use a tool such as Akismet for the heavy lifting and that filter service will occassionally catch a good comment in the mix of all of the spam.

Climatologist slams RealClimate.org for ‘erroneously communicating the reality of the how climate system is actually behaving’ – Rebuts Myths On Sea Level, Oceans and Arctic Ice

I have talked about RealClimate.org many times in the past. In general, the gentlemen over there are pretty smart but they do tend to be one-sided in their analysis. They consistently take the side of “global warming is caused by humans” and they don’t treat others with much respect.

I started questioning their partisanship when they lashed out at the UK judge that said that “An Inconvenient Truth” was not 100% factual. They didn’t like me calling them out on that.  They then spiked some of my comments on their site when degraded scientific discussion to a challenge of who has a bigger wallet.

Great April Fools joke by RealClimate

I typically share a funny or two on April Fools day however some on the ‘net prefer to write spoof articles. I can appreciate the humor of that approach but I sometimes wonder if we can learn more about the author by looking at the spoof article.

Take a moment to jump over and read the article at RealClimate, otherwise my comments may not make sense. Then come back and read the rest of this note.

Is RealClimate becoming balanced?

The scientists at RealClimate are amazingly smart.  I would never want to get into a deep scientific argument with these guys because they have so much scientific minutiae at their fingertips.  However, I have been moderately critical of them at times when they allow their zealousness for global warming to cloud their common sense.

Perhaps now though they are seeing things in a bit more balance. The latest article from RealClimate actually condemns some absurd global warming claims such as the extremes of weather (and that it is not affected by global warming) and the relative increases and decreases in certain animal populations (and that it is probably not global warming related either).  If you have read this blog over the many months that it has been published then you have seen such claims laughed at as well (see here for one of the more funny claims).

The bully children have taken over at RealClimate.org!

Typically, RealClimate.org is filled with very useful (and sometimes difficult to grasp) scientific discussion. I have frequently commented about their site and usually I am complimentary (although they have slammed this site a few times).

Unfortunately, their latest article is reprehensible or at least foolish. I commented on their site but I don’t expect that my criticisms will survive their moderation. If they do publish it, I am sure their many supporters will condemn me. I am reproducing the bulk of my opinions here for you to decide.

More on report

It seems that everyone else is doing a great job of beating up the report.  I am not sure that I will have to spend any time on it since everyone else is really challenging the science and the techniques in the report.  The folks at RealClimate appear to be quiet on it though.  I would be interested in their thoughts and if they will follow blindly or will they actually be critical of the parts that bear questioning?

This comes from Climate Depot

U.S. Government Scientist: ‘I disagree strongly with the hurricane-related conclusions of this report!’

and this was later in the post.

Not cool anymore – followup (Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions)

As a quick followup to my earlier posting on the 1,000 year irreversibility status of global warming.  The folks over at RealClimate also did a story on this subject but they tried to make the distinction that “irreversible” does mean “unstoppable”.  I think they are trying to play with words a bit but I will let you decide for yourselves.  As I read the abstract of the study (below), I do not think that they are following the same logic that the original authors followed.  That is okay though since science is all about discussing the different hypotheses and then testing them.

The Global Warming Challenge

The Climate Bet – April 29, 2008

You may be aware of the current personal campaign that I am engaged with regarding what I consider to be improper behavior at RealClimate. The authors of that site decided to bet the authors of a scientific paper. I do not feel that is responsible behavior but in my efforts to convince them I wanted to try and find other scientific bets that fall into their category of bet (largely financial v. gentleman’s bet). To date I have failed in that search, I did find some interesting gems to share with you.

The much maligned Drs. Singer and Gray

This is not an obituary of Dr. Fred Singer or Dr. William Gray, even though the title of this article may lead you to believe that.  Dr. Gray is the Professor of Atmospheric Science, Head of the Tropical Meteorology Project at Colorado State and is the noted writer of the hurricane forecast every year.  Dr. Singer is currently the Director and President of The Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP).

I am writing this article simply because I am amazed at the bitterness that is delivered upon these two men.

A search for Dr. Singer and Dr. Gray on RealClimate.org reveals an amazing amount of sarcasm and lack of respect for the two gentlemen. Why? Well, they obviously don’t agree with many of the writers of RealClimate.  The sad thing is that they definitely have the credentials to disagree and still command respect.

Reader questions – Part 1 of 4

I enjoy emails from readers of this site.  My contact information is in the About page and the comments and encouragement I receive makes this site a joy to run.  I recently received an email from Brittany C asking four questions.  Brittany is allowing me to publish her questions and my answers.  These answers are a combination of scientific fact with conjecture and opinion from me.

Question 1: Why is the warming that has taken place in this past decade been such a big deal when there seems to be a similar warming trend in the 1930s?  Is there a difference between the two? 

Great question.  I am going to break it up into 3 parts: