On the Elusive Absolute Global Mean Surface Temperature – A Model-Data Comparison


Thank you Bob for all you do ;>)

Originally posted on Bob Tisdale - Climate Observations:

With the publication of the IPCC 5th Synthesis Report, I thought there might be some interest in a presentation of how well (actually poorly) climate models simulate global mean surface temperatures in absolute terms.  That is, most climate model outputs are presented in terms of anomalies, with data shown as deviations from the temperatures of a multi-decadal reference period. See Figure 1.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Rarely, are models and model-data comparisons shown in absolute terms.  That’s what’s presented in this post after a discussion of the estimates of Earth’s absolute mean surface temperature from data suppliers:  GISS, NCDC and BEST.  Afterwards, we return to anomalies.

View original 5,152 more words

Featured Image -- 60

Is NOAA Wrong?


they are not wrongheaded they are lairs nuff said ;>(

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

On another post here on Watts Up With That, a commenter pointed out that NOAA says that September 2014 was the warmest September ever on record. The commenter asked, “Is NOAA  wrong?”

Sadly, as near as I can tell the answer is “Quite possibly”.

Here is the NOAA graphic in question, showing their idea of the current year to date in black, and the five warmest years in color.

noaa year to date global temperatureFigure 1. NOAA’s graphic showing the progress of the year to date. SOURCE

Man, they are squeezing it to claim this September was the warmest, looks like a three-way tie to me … but I digress.

Now, I have read in a lot of places that we currently have good agreement between the satellite temperature data and the ground temperature data. Each time I read that, I just laugh. While the two measurements are closer than they have been…

View original 438 more words

Featured Image -- 58

Why would anyone believe a single word coming out of their mouth?


thanks this will drive my warmmy friends nuts ;>)

Originally posted on Pointman's:

One of the climate alarmist’s standard responses to any criticism of the theory of global warming is that unless the person is a climate scientist themselves, the point being made is from a position of ignorance and can therefore be ignored. As with most propaganda designed to silence any opposition, there’s an element of truth in it.

However, I think there are a number of obvious rebuttals to such an arrogant and dismissive stance.

The regularity with which the skeptic community eviscerates alarmist papers indicates to me that they’re actually more on top of the hard science than the alarmists researchers. In general, the depth of science expertise in the skeptic community is reflected in the technical content of the leading skeptic sites and the quality of the comments, which indicate an unusually high proportion of visitors with some sort of science, engineering or mathematical background; slightly geeky to be frank but…

View original 1,370 more words

The Original Hide-the-Decline


Thank you for this Steve but really it is another HUMM moment in this sorry mess ;>)

Originally posted on Climate Audit:

In a twitter exchange among Jean S, Ronan Connolley and Tim Osborn, Ronan drew attention to an early spaghetti graph in a comment on MBH98 published by Phil Jones in Science on the day after (Apr 24, 1998) publication of Mann et al 1998. The Briffa reconstruction is in purple below. Like IPCC 2001, it hides the decline in the Briffa reconstruction (here a 1998 version) by deleting late 20th century values – here after 1950.

Figure 1. From Jones 1998 comment on MBH98. Orange – Mann et al 1998; green – Jones et al 1998; purple – Briffa et al 1998.

Jones stated that all three reconstructions “clearly show” that the 20th century is the warmest in the 600-year period, with the most “dramatic feature” being the 20th century rise:

Despite the different methods of reconstruction and the different series used, or alternatively, because a few good ones…

View original 898 more words

ACLU and National Media Intervene in Mann v Steyn et al


This is a MANN smack down ;>)

Originally posted on Climate Audit:

I get the sense that the Washington libel community and U.S. national media have belatedly woken up to the potential threat of Mann v Steyn and that the tide is now starting to run strongly against Mann in the anti-SLAPP proceedings. The most visible evidence of this is an impressive Amici brief from the ACLU and an imposing list of 25 other media organizations (the Reporters Committee for Press Freedom, the American Society of News Editors, the Association of American Publishers, the Association of Alternative Newsmedia (The Village Voice et al), NBC Universal, Bloomberg News, the publishers of USA Today, Time, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, The Detroit Free Press, The Seattle Times, The Arizona Republic and The Bergen County Record) filed on August 11, 2014.

In addition, Steyn’s own Amicus brief substantially upped the ante on a separate front. It repeatedly and directly accused…

View original 1,588 more words

New pictures of the hole in Yamal – and Pingo was its name-o


Thank’s Antho-ney seen these in the territory’s Canada but never had a name for them till now ;>)

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

A couple of days ago I posted this story about the odd hole in the ground that appeared in Yamal, which was immediately blamed on ‘global warming’ by some fool who hadn’t looked at it closely:

Anna Kurchatova from the Sub-Arctic Scientific Research Centre, thinks the crater was formed by a mixture of water, salt and gas igniting an underground explosion, a result of global warming.

The most plausible explanation so far is a collapsed “pingo”, and these new pictures and video from the Siberian Times suggest it probably is. The pictures below from Parks Canada show similar structures in the process of collapse. For those that want to blame the collapse on “global warming” you might also note it is summer in Yamal, and melting ice is a regular and expected occurrence.

View original 267 more words

Are Polar Bears Really Endangered?


Yes the bear’s are fine

Originally posted on polarbearscience:

Christina Wu at the Urban Times (July 3, 2014) recently asked this question. She came up with a surprisingly balanced argument but some predictable responses from IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) biologists. As a consequence, she overlooked some critical facts that make a big difference to the answer.

Figure 1. Are polar bears really endangered? The US Fish and Wildlife Service thinks so, but only because Steven Amstrup, based on a computer model projecting sea ice out to 2050, said so (Amstrup et al. 2007). This information has been used by the Center for Biological Diversity and other NGOs, like WWF and Polar Bears International (where Amstrup is now employed), to solicit donations.

Figure 1. Predictions of polar bear population declines by 2050 are being used by the Center for Biological Diversity, WWF and Polar Bears International to solicit donations.

Wu stated that, for the populations for which we have numbers (see my discussion here), polar bear populations have been increasing overall since the 1970s. She then asked:

“So if polar bear populations are increasing, what’s all the fuss about?”

She went to PBSG biologists for answers. She talked to Elizabeth (Lily) Peacock, now a medical student, and Geoff York, who is employed full time for the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Apparently, they…

View original 1,133 more words