“Arctic Forecast Verification Update“. Arctic Sea Ice Extent has ticked upwards a bit faster than expected, so Steven Goddard has returned to arm-waving about how everything’s back to normal, just like he predicted by drawing a dashed line on some real data. Or should I say re-predicted. Oh great sage, why do you yap so much about short-term weather variables?
Steven's analysis-by-graphics-editor Arctic Sea Ice Extent prediction, complete with fuzzy pixel deletions.
“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.
“A spot check on NOAA’s “hottest so far” presser“. Anthony Watts tries to undercut NOAA’s 2010 temperature record analysis by pointing out Heartland Institute presenter and global warming dissembler Dr. Richard Keen’s observation that Coal Creek Canyon in Colorado, which lies outside the +4°F contour of the map below in spite of his claim otherwise, only has an anomaly of +1°F. Why that’s almost a decrease! Except it isn’t.
Ignore the Red States? Really Anthony!
That might work as an exercise in cherry-picking and arm-waving bluster over NOAA’s analysis, but it doesn’t work in support of the endlessly bellowed denialist claim that there is no Global Warming, does it?
At least Dr. Keen doesn’t repeat the idiotic claim that increased snowfall reflects lower temperatures.
Condensed Monckton: Anthony Watts takes a break from managing Steven McIntyre’s Climate Audit blog to help fellow denialists support “Lord” Monckton’s call for e-mail harassment of Prof. John Abraham of St. Thomas University (which Monckton calls a “half-assed Catholic Bible college”). Condensed in the sense of “no need to think, just click on the handy e-mail links and start ranting!”
So what’s triggered this? Prof. Abraham released a devastating analysis of Monckton’s intentionally misleading arguments against Global Warming. Monckton’s wounded ego has led to a two-pronged response:
The University of St. Thomas’ final response to Monckton, after a short e-mail exchange?
We received your email response to our June 25, 2010 letter. The University of St Thomas respects your right to disagree with Professor Abraham, just as the University respects Professor Abraham’s right to disagree with you. What we object to are your personal attacks against Father Dease, and Professor Abraham, your inflammatory language, and your decision to disparage Professor Abraham, Father Dease and The University of St Thomas.
Please be advised that neither we nor the University of St Thomas will communicate with you any further about your decision to sully the University of St. Thomas, Professor Abraham, and others rather than to focus on the scholarly differences between you and Professor Abraham.
Signed: Phyllis Karasov, Moore Costellow and Hart, P.L.L.P.
Denialists are actually casting this as proof that Monckton’s “rebuttal” has won the day!
Anthony; you’re out of your scientific depth (think playground splash pad) and you’re tying yourself to a boat anchor…
“WUWT Arctic Sea Ice News #9“. Steven Goddard declares that the topic for this Arctic Sea Ice News is “verification of data sources.” Why? Well a big change of focus is needed because this is what the NSIDC reports:
At the end of [May], extent fell near the level recorded in 2006, the lowest in the satellite record
So Steven talks about “concentration” instead of extend or volume, because that value is a little more ‘interpretable.’ He talks about Barrow, Alaska because the ice happens to be a bit thicker there. He talks about recent Arctic air temperatures. He keeps trying to promote the PIPS data because that also looks thicker.
Keep dancing, Steven, but we remember how you were crowing that Arctic Sea Ice Extent back in March was proof that the Arctic was recovering.
NSIDC 2010 Arctic Sea Ice Extent: an inconvenient truth.
Steven’s response to the clinical dismantling of his claims in the comments is to start talking about football (aka soccer) scores.
“Minority report: 50 year warming due to natural causes“. Anthony Watts reposts a blog article by Dr. Roy Spencer. Roy has fiddled around (from his own comments: “this was the result of a couple of hours of work on the weekend, and I didn’t mean to start a whole new research effort”) and managed to amaze himself by extracting a correlation that he uses to claim an unspecified natural cause (“changes in cloud cover”?) for the last 50 years of warming.
How does he do this? Why by mashing together the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) and Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) and only considering temperature change rate.
I've added the causation to Roy's correlation... After Roy Spencer, 2010/06/06.
Roy often shoots himself in the foot when he tries to use numbers and sure enough a disclaimer about a calculation error was posted within hours. Through the magic of denialist revision its gone now though. I should have grabbed the page for your entertainment.
Let’s say it together: “correlation is not causation.” Roy needs to present a clear mechanism for what he is describing. Turns out that what Roy has actually been plotting is temperature vs temperature, which obviously tracks itself very well…
Note that this computer model is getting a free pass from Anthony’s commenters as is the use of the “corrupt” CRUTem3 temperature data set from the vilified Dr. Phil Jones’ Climate Research Unit…
“GISTEMP is High“. Steven Goddard discovers that temperatures measured at ground-level are not the same as temperatures measured in the troposphere. Well, learning is a good thing I suppose.
He also discovers that different data-sets have a different geographic basis! The GISS data-set attempts to include high Arctic value, while the HadCRUT3 data-set (which Steven calls “Had-Crut”) excludes those values. Shocking.
The dastardly GISS data-set estimates 2010 to be the “warmest ever“, while HadCRUT3 expects 2010 to be the “fifth warmest ever“. It seems that Steven has been reduced to trying to cherry-pick the data-set that shows the least warming. Whatever happened to the claims of cooling? An inconvenient memory apparently.
“NIWA’s Kiwi Kaper“. Anthony Watts gravely informs us of an uncovered climate conspiracy in New Zealand. But fear not, a “skeptical” (right-wing) New Zealand politician is calling for the replacement the existing New Zealand NIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research) climate record of a 0.92°C twentieth-century warming trend with something more ‘suitable’. Namely that it should be depicted as “remarkably steady at 12.6°C“.
A former politician named Barry Brill tries to fake it up with a “substantial essay” on a right-wing Australian website called Quadrant Online. Barry is also Chairman of the fraudulent denialist “New Zealand Climate Science Coalition”, caught in 2009 telling flat-out lies about NZ weather records.
The claims are all about “smuggled data” from Dr. Jim Salinger that doesn’t gibe with denialist’s anecdotal recollections, cherry-picked counter-examples and imputed political motivation. Somehow a conspiracy to manipulate climate data was initiated in 1994 in order to support a left-wing political agenda created in 2007.
Here’s the response from the NIWA to the denialist games. The above chart illustrates the dishonesty of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition’s claim that temperatures have been “remarkably steady“. There’s a “kaper” alright, Anthony. You’re part of it.
“Spencer on Earth’s missing energy“. Dr. Roy Spencer draws a horizontal line through three years of satellite radiation observations and comes to the scientific conclusion that the difference between incoming and outgoing radiation means that the Earth is cooling. Take that Global Warming, you’ve been defeated by charts!
Well if you know what you want to find its easy to find it…
“The decrease in upper ocean heat content from March to April was 1C – largest since 1979“. Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. tries on his deceptive “where’s the beef?” complaint about measurement of ocean heat content again. Phil Klotzbach from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center has just reported that there has been a drop in the upper ocean heat anomaly.
Actually, the Climate Prediction Center is only talking about the upper 300m of the ocean, and only in the eastern half of the Pacific Ocean. So Dr. Pielke is enthusiastically extrapolating well beyond his data while also carefully ignoring as much inconvenient data as possible. He even chooses to display only 12 months of data to prove the climate trend! That’s weather, not climate, and when denialists do this they’re usually trying to hide something.
So we’ve got an non-significant time period and a global conclusion being drawn from a regional information. Even still the trend only applies to a cherry-picked subset (upper 300m) of that data! Everything else is waved away. We’re not watching Perry Mason at work here, are we?
Here’s Dr. Pielke’s dubious plot:
And here’s an example I pulled together from the CPC’s original data with a bit longer timeline:
Doesn’t look like the death of Global Warming after all. Just ordinary Pacific Ocean patterns on top of the well-established warming trend.
Speaking of warming, where does Dr. Pielke in his thoughtful scientific way declare that the “missing” heat has gone? He speculates that it was magically transported into space. In other words, he has no idea. But it’s certainly more entertaining than considering good old-fashioned ocean currents.
Wott's Up With That? 