Not So Hot

Did I scare you Bodhi1?

this article is simply what many of us global warming unscheptics (best word to describe me at least, not an evangelist or proponent, too strong of words for me) want. The gobbledygook from editorial pages that has no supporting materials for their assertions does not enlighten anyone to new information. This article did, however, and unless someone is a rabid evangelist, they should acknowledge that.

actually i have heard of the urban heat island effect for years.. they wanted us all to believe the model creators missed that.. or never lived in a city and had their feet burnt by the black top.
Problem is these stations are the only places we get the data... and it is interesting they quote the lower atmosphere temp reading as these gusy were going ape crap over the mid atmosphere as we didnt have any accurate measurements there.. and then when they also showed the world was warming, they simpoly refused to look at the data..
peopel also have to realise a couple things
the earth climate system is on a ballance beem, it takes very little unballance to tip it over. climate change can and has occured very very rapidly int he past, like years and not centuries or eons.
Zero sciencetists can deny.. find me 1 single one bodhi that denys co2 alone will heat a closed system when energy is introduced. More co2 = more heat..
now the only real question left is how much of the tons of co2 we have put in the atmosphere, changing the make up of the atmosphere at a statistcally significant level, is absorbed byt he oceans and forests.
The greennhouse gases, are what makes this planet livable, otherwise we would be a snowball..
Ok bodhi i challenge you to find someone that denys co2 reflects infrared light or someone that denys how much co2 we have put into the atmosphere.
I will however entertain the differnt carbon sequestration theories.. that currently are keeping the levels of co2 in the atmosphere to about 1/2 of what we have actually put up there.

so you dispute the validity of his concern about the temperature data collected in unstable and poor areas of the world? science does not work by ignoring doubts about data. He raised a good point, and climatologists either need to explain that they have already thought of those concerns and investigated the possible data corruption, or accept the concern and investigate it.

climatologists either need to explain that they have already thought of those concerns and investigated the possible data corruption, or accept the concern and investigate it.

Dr. Rasmus Benestad did just that. From his summary:

So in summary, I think the results of [McKitrick and Michaels'] analysis and conclusions are invalid because

• They do not properly account for dependencies.
• They over-fit the regression.
• Their results look unreasonable.
• They "cherry pick" the MSU data that gives the lowest trend

There are a lot of comments, most of which are well worth reading. There is even some discussion and response between Dr. Ross McKitrick, Rasmus Benestad, and Dr. Gavin Schmidt (climate modeler at NASA Goddard).

The paper by McKitrick and Michaels can be found here [.pdf].

As to Dr. Michaels' claim that his paper should have been met with much fanfare and press, it should be noted that it was met with about the same amount as most other papers of it's kind (and far more than any other in JGR-Atmosphere). Further, given that both of the paper's authors have written op-eds on the paper, it is likely it has received more than it's fair share of newsprint. Then again, Dr. Michael's claim has changed little. His major evidence that there is some great conspiracy that favors anthropogenic climate change? The lack of peer-reviewed evidence against it. Generally, in science, this is just considered a lack of evidence, not an argument for something else.

thanks for the information Jason.

who cares what he is, if he brings up a valid question about data validity, it should get answered. According to Jason, it has and I am satisfied with it.

Of course you are...

of course I am what? Satisfied that his questions about data have been answered?

So, because I am honest enough with my self that I can say "hey, that crack pot knee-jerk denier actually has a good point, lets see what happens when we answer it" some how it makes me a closeted denier?

Yeah? Name a GOP candidate for President who doesn't realize the danger of global warming.

Gwenny,

Other than complaining about those who think Global Warming is man made and attempt to get ohers on board, what is it that you are doing to help the world population adjust to the new reality that will await them if they do not act now?

those who think Global Warming is man made and attempt to get ohers on board

The GW cult is doomed to failure because 1) They are wrong. Climate change is natural and, while it has been impacted by human activity, it is not CAUSED by human activity; 2) Their narrow focus and their ridiculous claims will ultimately hurt progress as the ignorant, uneducated public who can only barely digest sound bites sees reality at odds with the hype (coldest winter on record in some parts of Australia last year/record breaking cold in California destroying entire crops/expanding of parts of the Antarctic ice fields); 3) We don't need to change the Earth, we need to change ourselves and buying a new "green" car is not enough.

what is it that you are doing to help the world population adjust to the new reality that will await them if they do not act now?

Way more than the GW cultists, for sure. The focus on CO2 is wrong and the changes that need to be made far more sweeping and drastic than anything they are promoting. One thing I have done is be defiantly anti-anthropomorphic global warming since at least 1994 (Had you even heard of climate change in 1994?),advocating that we expand our understanding of the situation and make changes to our society and personal lives. My second website, which is currently down, I have to see what happened, was about the environment and my tagline is: The Earth is not dying - it is being killed. And the people who are killing it have names and addresses. - U. Utah Phillips I belong to the tree-hugging, Earth worshiping movement that goes back over a century and has been trying to raise folks consciousness the entire time. I've advocated Earth friendly living since the 70s (I did not even get a drivers license until I was 30, preferring walking whenever possible), even running a youth group called GaiaNauts: Children of Spaceship Earth for several years and inculcating children with an adoration and respect for our lovely planet. I was recycling in the 1980s, going around our neighborhood with my baby in a stroller, picking up trash and taking the aluminum to the recycling center long before it was "hip". I participated in the first Earth Day when I was 13 yo. I have walked my talk for almost 40 years.