“Global Warming not to blame for toad extinction“. Anthony Watts tries to present a Columbia University press release as disproof of the claim that global warming drove the extinction of Costa Rica’s Monteverde golden toad. The paper’s disputed conclusion is actually that drying due to El Niño weather patterns allowed a harmful chytrid fungus to spread into the toad’s habitat.

The press release says that “proving a link between climate change and biodiversity loss is difficult because so many overlapping factors may be at play, including habitat destruction, introduction of disease, pollution and normal weather variability.” Not too difficult for Anthony to disprove though.

WMO: “. . . we cannot at this time conclusively identify anthropogenic signals in past tropical cyclone data.” Anthony Watts considers this recent report by The World Meteorological Organization a “stunning statement” about the frequency of cyclones. They haven’t increased statistically, so there’s no global warming! Anthony found this on right-wing political scientist (and self-proclaimed “honest broker”) Roger Pielke Jr.’s blog.

Actually, among other things the authors say “it remains uncertain whether past changes in tropical cyclone frequency have exceeded the variability expected through natural causes.” Emphasis mine. Not quite so stunning. More like scientifically honest, in fact.

This is the kind of “weather not climate” data that denialists love to talk up. It’s a low volume but variable record that is easily misrepresented. They can also count on honest scientists making the usual statistical cautionary statements, which can then be used against them (see Pielke’s blog in general).

However, I think that global warming is actually predicted to increase the intensity of cyclones, not the frequency. I also like how Anthony unselfconsciously posts a chart showing that ocean temperature has been unequivocally going up! Hey, Anthony! Shhhhhh…

“Setting the Record Straight on the IPCC WG II Fourth Assessment Report“. Right-wing partisan economist Indur M. Goklany is annoyed with Professor Martin Parry’s interview in Nature for failing to talk about what Indur M. Goklany wants him to talk about.

Goklany has yet to meet a nit that he can resist picking. The gist of his complaint seems to be the misdirection of we must solve every other human problem before we do anything about climate change.