Scientist calls for barring Mann, Jones, and Rahmstorf

Dr. Eduardo Zorita has called for the barring of several of the people who recently had their emails released to the public. Dr. Zorita is not a typical “denier” but rather a paleoclimatologist from GKSS who has published many works within the field.  Because I value how Dr. Zorita explains his position I re-publish it here without edit or further editorial comment. I sincerely hope that his fears that “my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication” but I fear that folks that sympathize with people like Mann, Jones and Rahmstorf could, very likely, be very cruel to those that question members of their club.


Climatologist slams 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 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.


Utilities seem to be a problem for analysis

I have had a few posts on the recent report from the US Administration regarding global warming. My posts all reference the great work of other bloggers on the subject. This post will be no different.

Steve McIntyre builds on the work of Climate Skeptic in digging into the utility industry and the vast increases in outages that they are suffering through due to the rampant bad weather that we are enjoying due to global warming.


Recent glacier and climate variations in the Pacific Northwest

Quaternary Research Center, University of Washington

There does not appear to be a date on this article nor does it appear to be peer reviewed in a scientific journal. The author does appear to have some credibility though as it credits him as being with the University of Washington and URL implies that he is with the faculty of that august learning institution. His website also credits him with writing multiple articles since 1962.

The article tracks a specific glacier and its shrinking over the course of several hundred years. It is very apparent from the graph from that article that the shrinking has been relatively consistent since the mid 1800s and in fact may have slightly slowed down in recent decades (maybe we could put a hockey stick on this and show that the glacier is actually growing now).


Global warming forecast predicts rise in 2014

Telegraph – August 9, 2007

I constantly tirade against the climate computer models that predict global warming. I really don’t see how they can be accurate based on my knowledge of them and the many “assumptions” that I know they make.

Here is an article on climate models that actually gives me hope that we are moving in the right direction!

According to the article (and to the best of my knowledge), this is the first computer model that is not designed to predict the climate in 50 or 100 years but rather predicts it in 10 years. I think this is important, since if you can get 10 years correct (something that is verifiable in 10 years), we can gain confidence in the 20, 30, 50 and 100 year predictions if they use the same modeling techniques.


Statistics needed

National Post – November 28, 2006

Notable quote:

Dr. Edward Wegman: “I am baffled by the claim that the incorrect method doesn’t matter because the answer is correct anyway. Method Wrong + Answer Correct = Bad Science.” With bad science, only true believers can assert that they nevertheless obtained the right answer.

I have repeatedly called for better math and computational methodologies to understand our current climate change predicament. My statement comes from the belief that if we don’t understand where we are and how we got here, how in the world can we make appropriate changes that can bring meaningful changes?



Friends of Science

There is no date on this site so I can’t reference when this was written.  This is great little article in Question / Answer format (or in this case Myth / Fact).  I have heard many of these statements before but it is good to read them on one site for evaluation.  The Friends of Science site is fairly critical of the concept of global warming and in some cases I think their answers and articles could be slightly more balanced.  Definitely an article worth spending some time on.

I have included all of the Myth statements below but have intentionally edited for brevity the Fact statement.  Click through to get the whole article.


Hockey Stick again – Welkom bij Natuurwetenschap & Techniek – February 2005

This is a fairly long article by Marcel Crok that has been translated into english. It is full of statistical analysis. It declares that much of the underlining assumptions for the rapid increase in global temperatures is quite flawed from a statistical standpoint. A few points:

They carefully studied the script and found something very unusual. McIntyre:“In a conventional PC calculation in a high-level language, the mean of each series is subtracted from each column prior to the rest of the algorithm. Instead of doing this, Mann’s Fortran program had only subtracted the 1902-1980 mean from each column. This is a highly unusual procedure and had not been mentioned in the Nature article.”