CO2 Optical Illusion

CO2 Optical Illusion. Steven Goddard is nothing if not stubborn. He still thinks that graphics editors can be used to prove that Global Warming is a lie. NASA’s Earth Observatory image of the day has him all riled up.

Here he once again mangles legitimate scientific images and then counts pixels to prove… something. Although he admits that “This is not a perfect equal area projection – so the pixel count method is not 100% accurate” it doesn’t stop him from speaking from the mountaintop. He declares that “5% more pixels were below normal than were above normal” but ignores the unreported areas (most of India and China) that almost all lie within hotter than normal regions.

Pixels, eh Steven? I think you’re actually looking at pixies. I suppose it makes a change from arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

10 thoughts on “CO2 Optical Illusion

  1. Agreed.

    I absolutely refuse to go to WTFUWT and I’m a bit bemused sometimes by others references. This lets me keep up with the farce without increasing that man’s hit count.

  2. OT:

    Christopher Monckton and other deniers get far more press coverage than they deserve. Journalistic false balance has caused the public to be confused on climate change – the greatest threat to humanity this century. Worse, these deniers have used mainstream media to attack climate science and the scientists who pursue the truth. Let us now turn the tables.

    Monckton has been exposed by Dr. John Abraham and instead of hiding his tail and whimpering away, Monckton has gone on the offensive by attacking Dr. Abraham and asking his followers to essentially “email bomb” Dr. Abraham’s university president. We need to alert the media to this story.

    I have assembled a list of 57 media contacts in the hopes that my readers will follow my lead and send letters asking for an investigation of Monckton and his attack on Abraham. I have placed mailto links that will make it easy to send letters to several contacts at once with a single click.

    In the thread comments, please suggest other contacts in the US and from abroad. This blog thread can then be used in the future to alert the media to denialist activity.

  3. I’ve done many kinds of analyses of various climate-related phenomena over the years, and Goddard’s technique of pixel-counting is new to me. It’s bizarre and rather stupid, to say the least.

  4. Phil Jones ‘endorsed’ Oxburgh’s paper selection

    The eleven representative publications that the Panel considered in detail are
    listed in Appendix B. The papers cover a period of more than twenty years and
    were selected on the advice of the Royal Society. All had been published in
    international scientific journals and had been through a process of peer review.
    CRU agreed that they were a fair sample of the work of the Unit.The Panel
    was also free to ask for any other material that it wished and did so.
    Individuals on the panel asked for and reviewed other CRU research materials.

    So we already knew that ‘CRU’ endorsed the paper selection – we know now that this was done in person by the Director of the Unit. Well, I am shocked, just shocked, I tell you.

    Bishop Hill is the new Bernstein, no mistake.

  5. “Quote of the week: Stephen Schneider jumps the shark.” (WUWT, July 18, 2010)

    STEPHEN SCHNEIDER (1945-2010)

    WUWT loses by the decision to only close the comments, instead of taking down the entire post. There will now be more people actually reading the Stanford magazine interview, because of its ‘last words’ status. And the justapositioning will show a reasonableness/extremism balance that goes strongly against WUWT.

  6. “Sea Ice News #14–an inconvenient July” (WUWT, July 18, 2010)

    CRYOSPHERE TODAY………. Steve apparently chooses to present the current ice extent w/concentration map along with some other year’s in order to utilize the DARKER COLOR SCALE used in the comparisons.
    (Another difference: “sea ice concentration less than 30% are not displayed in these images.”)

    For a more detailed, and colorful display, view the single image here

Leave a Reply to Hank Roberts Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s