MAIN INDEX RULES & LEGEND LOG IN  

Slowtwitch Forums: Lavender Room:
Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again

 
   
Tri ForumTri
ClassifiedsClassifieds
Lavender RoomLavender
JobsJobs
The WomensWomens
NoticesNotices


big kahuna

Jul 30, 12 8:25

Post #1 of 15 (936 views)
Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again Quote | Reply
Since ol' Kenny's probably having an orgasm over the supposed "scientific findings" of self-professed "former climate change skeptic" Richard Muller, I thought I'd do what I could to cause a bout of climate coitus interruptus. ;-) Seems that the estimable Anthony Watts and the boys over at the climate skeptic website "Watts Up With That?" scooped ol' Muller and his findings yesterday afternoon, presenting their own findings that show that "half the global warming in the United States is artificial," i.e. NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) and its boys and girls have been mistakenly doubling U.S. temperature trends due to NOAA station siting problems and "post-measurement adjustments." That last is Watts' diplomatic way of saying NOAA's been making climate change shit up. ;-)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/...elease-2/#more-68286

The below chart from the Watts et al study just about says it all:


A reanalysis of U.S. surface station temperatures has been performed using the recently WMO-approved Siting Classification System devised by METEO-France’s Michel Leroy. The new siting classification more accurately characterizes the quality of the location in terms of monitoring long-term spatially representative surface temperature trends. The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments.


The new improved assessment, for the years 1979 to 2008, yields a trend of +0.155C per decade from the high quality sites, a +0.248 C per decade trend for poorly sited locations, and a trend of +0.309 C per decade after NOAA adjusts the data. This issue of station siting quality is expected to be an issue with respect to the monitoring of land surface temperature throughout the Global Historical Climate Network and in the BEST network.




ClimateDepot also chimed in on the Muller takedown, and Watts seems to be up to a bit of mischief here, presenting a paper that actually builds upon some of Richard Muller's own work, while also imitating the pre-release gag that Muller himself has used in the past:

"The pre-release of this paper follows the practice embraced by Dr. Richard Muller, of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project in a June 2011 interview with Scientific American’s Michael Lemonick in “Science Talk”, said:


“I know that is prior to acceptance, but in the tradition that I grew up in (under Nobel Laureate Luis Alvarez) we always widely distributed “preprints” of papers prior to their publication or even submission. That guaranteed a much wider peer review than we obtained from mere referees.”"






(This post was edited by big kahuna on Jul 30, 12 8:37)


justgeorge

Jul 30, 12 12:00

Post #2 of 15 (888 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
You mean this temp gauge doesn't give an accurate reading? Who'da thunk it?



Or this one?



chainpin

Jul 30, 12 12:04

Post #3 of 15 (883 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
UHI along with blatant shitty placement of "official" stations (airport runways is my personal favorite) is so bad it makes one wonder whether any of the "official" data represents anything other than pure horseshit.

"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06



veganerd

Jul 30, 12 12:45

Post #4 of 15 (854 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [chainpin] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
chainpin wrote:
UHI along with blatant shitty placement of "official" stations (airport runways is my personal favorite) is so bad it makes one wonder whether any of the "official" data represents anything other than pure horseshit.

urban heat islands were first described in the 1800's long before weather stations existed.

enemy of epilepsy


chainpin

Jul 30, 12 12:52

Post #5 of 15 (844 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply


"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06



justgeorge

Jul 30, 12 13:45

Post #6 of 15 (820 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [veganerd] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
It has nothing to do with "urban heat island" how accurate do you think the temp readings are when they have the exhaust from an A/C unit blowing on it or their sitting in a parking lot getting all the heat off the asphalt?


veganerd

Jul 30, 12 13:54

Post #7 of 15 (812 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [justgeorge] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
justgeorge wrote:
It has nothing to do with "urban heat island" how accurate do you think the temp readings are when they have the exhaust from an A/C unit blowing on it or their sitting in a parking lot getting all the heat off the asphalt?

it depends on how quickly the heat disapates fromt the ac unit. please enlightne me on what that distance is.

enemy of epilepsy


link5485

Jul 30, 12 14:40

Post #8 of 15 (789 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
Did you actually read what he wrote? http://www.nytimes.com/...tic.html?ref=opinion
I really wish all the people that don't believe in climate change would head to the coast and buy some beach front property.


Fleck

Jul 30, 12 15:26

Post #9 of 15 (780 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
BK,

Erratic, and wrong temperature readings aside.

I know you anti-global warming folks like to trot this sort of stuff out. How do you explain the extraordinary and accelerating loss of sea ice cover in the Arctic and Antarctic? The massive receding of all major glaciers? The movement north or to higher altitudes of certain, species of animals over time to latitudes and altitudes they have never been seen in? The complete disappearance of certain animal species at other latitudes and elevations? and so on.

Clearly something is going on and all of the evidence is that it's warmer now than it has been in a long time. Why? And then of course, what do we do about it?

I agree that the "What to do about it?", is extraordinarily challenging if the linkage to carbon usage and Co2 is made. If you think about it, it's all linked to our economy - the wealthier and more successful a country is, the more carbon they burn and the more Co2 they produce! That will be a hard model to change or recreate. The reality is currently there is no solution.
Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog | EventsOnline | Bibnumbers.com


morey000

Jul 31, 12 7:54

Post #10 of 15 (678 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
This would be very damaging...

if global climate change science was relying mostly on the data from these sensors.

It's akin to discovering that one of the rock strata in which many fossiles were found was incorrectly dated, and then claiming that evolution is not true.

Climate science is quite a bit bigger than this.

what you have shown is that that the scientific process works. that the data is peer reviewed and people are always out there looking for errors. Great, some were found. Now- that we know this, what is the effect on the climate models? (the NYT article says that this finding didn't change the conclusions) What your article failed to say is what the ramifications of this study are to climatology predictions. I suggest that you are getting way ahead of yourself by raising this as confirmation, or even evidence- that greenhouse gasses aren't causing global climate change.


BarryP

Jul 31, 12 8:06

Post #11 of 15 (671 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [Fleck] [In reply to] Quote | Reply

Quote:
How do you explain the extraordinary and accelerating loss of sea ice cover in the Arctic and Antarctic?


Because that ice is in a parking lot with AC units exhaust pointing at it. Duh!

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485


AngrySaki

Aug 1, 12 15:40

Post #12 of 15 (609 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
http://www.skepticalscience.com/..._paper_critique.html

Suprise suprise. Turns out Watts' conclusions and unjustified.

TL;DR:
Watts basically uses "raw data" as the gold standard, which doesn't take into account known biases in temperature measurements. ( like time of day (of measurements) and instrument change.)

This quote from quote from an actual scientist from 2010 sum it up nicely:

"There is practically no time of observation bias in urban-based stations which have taken their measurements punctually always at the same time, while in the rural stations the times of observation have changed. The change has usually happened from the afternoon to the morning. This causes a cooling bias in the data of the rural stations. Therefore one must correct for the time of observation bias before one tries to determine the effect of the urban heat island"


Dilbert

Aug 1, 12 15:57

Post #13 of 15 (595 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
Why did you post that?

Your demographic will believe any bullshit because they trust AUTHORITY FIGURES and ignore science and, you know, what's the word, FACTS?

You need not say anything for them, man. They are already with you.

The realists, OTOH, we prefer FACTS and facts come from real actual scientists. Not paid shills working for some conservative scaremongering plaebian-controlling institute. There's nothing you can say that will change our mind because we can tell a difference between real facts and bullshit.

You have not won any argument here. You are just repeating the same incorrect bullshit all over again.


jeffp

Aug 2, 12 8:43

Post #14 of 15 (554 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [Dilbert] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
Just curious, did you mean to sound just like the crap you were arguing against?


morey000

Aug 2, 12 9:12

Post #15 of 15 (547 views)
Re: Anthony Watts (WUWT) and Climate Depot Take Down The Climate Fanatics Once Again [big kahuna] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
BK. Just wondering if you are man-enough to come back on this one and admit you were wrong.

???

   
 
 
 
The New Specialized Wind Tunnel
Will this be a game changer for Specialized, in both sales and product design, or will it not move the sales and design needle versus those in Specialized's competitive set?
Yes, Game Changer
Minor move forward
Won't budge the needle