Global Warming: Man or Myth?

Scientists can also wear their citizen hats

NSF: Climate Trash Talkers Got No Game!

with 24 comments

In sports, we have all seen or heard of players who before a big game talk lots of smack and then fail to deliver the goods when it counts.  In climate science there has been much trash talk by those that do not accept the overwhelming evidence that humans are now driving climate change.  Much of this trash talk has been centered around stolen email messages from the Climate Research Unit regarding the hockey stick temperature reconstruction that Drs. Mann, Bradley, and Hughes published in 1998/99.  The email hack was inappropriately dubbed by the press as Climategate.  The trash talkers use these emails (taken out of context) in an attempt to prove that there is a vast global conspiracy to fool billions of people.  Sounds crazy but even those running for President believe this absurdity.

Every investigation of the stolen emails has exonerated the scientists involved.  Now, the National Science Foundation’s Inspector General has also told the trash talkers: You Got No Game!

The story was first reported by Joe Romm over at Climate Progress in his post Climate Secret: NSF Quietly Closes Out Inspector General Investigation with Complete Vindication of Michael Mann.  The NSF IG report regarding Dr. Mann’s research concludes:

“The research in question was originally completed over 10 years ago. Although the Subject’s data is still available and still the focus of significant critical examination, no direct evidence has been presented that indicates the Subject fabricated the raw data he used for his research or falsified his results…Lacking any direct evidence of research misconduct, as defined under the NSF Research Misconduct Regulation, we are closing this investigation with no further action.”

The NSF IG findings are no surprise to those that respect science and have actually looked at the data.  As I showed in Shooting the Messenger with Blanks, the hockey stick-shaped temperature reconstruction that shows modern climate considerably warmer than past climate has been duplicated by many scientists using different methodologies (PCA, CPS, EIV, isotopic analysis, & direct T measurements) and with different types of proxy data.

And, of course, Mother Nature did not read the hacked emails.  There is unequivocal evidence that the planetary system is warming and the pattern of warming shows that increases in heat-trapping gases are to blame.  The oceans and air are warming, ice is at record lows, devastating heat waves and droughts have plagued the US and rest of the world, and massive flooding events have caused billions in damages world-wide.  As reported by Reuters (Aug. 17, 2011), “the United States has already tied its yearly record for billion-dollar weather disasters and the cumulative tab from floods, tornadoes and heat waves has hit $35 billion, the National Weather Service said on Wednesday.”  That record will likely be broken with several months still left and Hurricane Irene taking aim at the US east coast.  As of this blog post, Irene is expected to intensify to a major hurricane (category three) and strike somewhere between North Carolina and Long Island, NY this weekend.  Experts tell us that global warming is likely to increase hurricane intensity and flooding rainfall (Knutson et al., 2010) so get used to this if we continue on our business as usual emission path.

Given the obvious innocence of Dr. Mann and other scientists, it is clear that people such as Virginia Attorney General Ken Cucinelli and Chris Horner of Competitive Enterprise Institute and American Tradition Institute, who are still seeking private emails of Dr. Mann from his time at University of Virginia, are on a political witch-hunt.

So I say to you trash-talkers:

Climate change is already here and it is only going to get worse and more costly.  Do you realize that by denying the science, attacking the scientists, and refusing to sit at the “solution table”, you are going to have those solutions put into place without your input?  Right now you have no game.  Why don’t you show up to play?  Let’s see what you got.

Others covering this story:

Hockey Stick Data Tampering Investigation Concludes by Greg Laden

National Science Foundation vindicates Michael Mann by Richard Littlemore

NSF IG report on Michael Mann investigation: “No research misconduct. Case closed.” Don’t bother telling Rick Perry. by Rick Piltz

Mann Vindicated — AGAIN! by The Policy Lass

Michael Mann innocent of all “Climategate” charges: Penn State investigation complete by Jan Dash

“Climategate” Debunked Again. Climate Deniers: Mike Mann born in Kenya. by Peter Sinclair

Hockey Stick Conspiracy Expands!!! by Barry Bickmore

Federal auditors find no evidence to support ‘Climategate’ accusations by Douglas Fischer

About these ads

Written by Scott Mandia

August 23, 2011 at 3:58 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

24 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. OK, I will show up to play . . .

    Measured temperature anomaly reports are available on the web from five government sponsored agencies (including the three that go back to 1850). Average them to avoid bias. Google “climate change is dominated by natural phenomena” for a pdf that gives the links to these reports, graphs of the data and an equation that calculates average global temperatures since 1895 (that’s 115 years and counting) with an accuracy of 88.4% (87.9% if CO2 is assumed to have no influence).

    From 2001 through May, 2011 the atmospheric CO2 increased by 22.3% of the total increase from 1800 to 2001 while the average global temperature has not increased. The 22.3% CO2 increase is the significant measurement, not the comparatively brief time period. Once the current trend gets established I expect it to be down at a rate of about 0.13 C/decade; steeper if the sun goes really quiet.

    Dan Pangburn

    August 23, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    • Holoca..I mean climate denier!!

      klem

      August 24, 2011 at 12:30 pm

  2. Dan, you do realize that cherry picking small sample sizes means very little when it comes to linear trends, right? But I’ll play; from 2006 thru the present there has been a warming of about .14C/decade. This is about the same for the period 2000 thru present. You cherry picked the wrong data. See how one year change in start date can have such big results when your data points are so few? As for your fantasy about cooling, that’s all it is. There’s no physics to back it up.

    PS: The oceans, which hold by far the most heat, are also warming the last ten years.

    Robert Murphy

    August 23, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    • The top few meters.

      klem

      August 24, 2011 at 12:30 pm

      • The top 2,000 meters.

        Robert Murphy

        August 24, 2011 at 6:57 pm

    • Ha! Wishful thinking.

      klem

      August 25, 2011 at 7:14 am

      • It’s also the truth. The measurements showing ocean warming go down 2,000 meters.

        Robert Murphy

        August 25, 2011 at 7:56 am

  3. OK, folks. Let us not allow this post to stray. Dan said his piece. We know that the warming is unequivocal and that the pattern of warming in the past several decades cannot be explained by natural causes. See: http://profmandia.wordpress.com/2011/07/21/global-warming-heat-waves-yes-rollercoasters-no/

    Scott Mandia

    August 23, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    • “warming in the past several decades cannot be explained by natural causes”

      At least not yet, however no one hsa yet been abe to rule out natural causes.

      cheers

      klem

      August 24, 2011 at 12:21 pm

  4. Dan’s a cherry picker (and is cherries are sour).

    He is also wrong about the significance of the comparatively short time period.

    arch stanton

    August 23, 2011 at 6:17 pm

  5. Scott, I missed your last post or I would not have posted…

    Congratulations to Dr Mann. The damage from false allegations is unfortunate, predictable and unfair. Subsequently, it is those who have attempted political advantage from false claims that should be the ones whose reputations should suffer. Not Dr Mann’s.

    Dr Mann has proven to be such a lighting rod for false claims that I have little doubt that false allegations will continue and I will not be shocked to see it claimed that he is indeed from Kenya or that Al Gore is his mother.

    arch stanton

    August 23, 2011 at 6:39 pm

    • That’s right he has been exonerated. Too bad his studies have not.

      klem

      August 24, 2011 at 12:31 pm

      • Sure they have, many times. Can’t say the same for Mcintyre’s, Mckitrick’s, or Wegman’s. Mann’s mistake was a minor one that had little effect on the main points of his study; theirs was a fundamental screwup that made the main thesis of their works garbage. Really, this is old news. You climate trash talkers really *do* have no game.

        Robert Murphy

        August 24, 2011 at 7:19 pm

      • Perhaps we have no game, but we’ve won anyway.

        Cheers

        Mandia: Klem, climate chnage is occurring and there will be solutions put into place. Do you wish to sit at that table to offer ideas or will you keep your head in the sand and then have unfavorable solutions imposed on you. So you can play the game or sit on the bench. I suggest getting into the game.

        klem

        August 25, 2011 at 7:16 am

  6. Walking the Walk: Developing a Sustainable Civilization

    Beyond the Bailout … a Bigger Problem… and a Solution

    http://www.triplepundit.com/2010/09/beyond-bailout-bigger-problem-solution/

    As job losses soar and major parts of the financial world descend into insolvency, you may feel that you’re apocalypsed-out. If so, you may not immediately leap at James Lovelock’s new book, The Vanishing Face of Gaia. His warning that climate change is spinning us into a hotter world, where billions will starve and whole ecosystems will collapse, is a horror few want to contemplate. But his prophecies are plausible and they will also make you think, which are two good reasons to grit your teeth and read him. The Vanishing Face of Gaia, hailed as “the most important book for decades”, is powerful because Lovelock is a serious, hands-on scientist. What he calls his “final warning” has new resonance because of the increasingly alarming data that is coming from the observation of everything from species numbers and deforestation to sea levels and Arctic ice.

    Now for the good news…black is the new green. As reported first in last month’s SLDI Newsletter, Lovelock believes that charcoal produced from biomass, known as “biochar,” is one of the only answers to climate change we have. He states, “There is one way we could save ourselves and that is through the massive burial of charcoal…you can start shifting really hefty quantities of carbon out of the system and pull the CO2 down quite fast.” The theory is that biomass – any plant or animal material – can be turned into charcoal by heating it in the absence of oxygen and by taking CO2 out of the atmosphere; the impact on climate change could be huge. According to some early estimates of biochar’s potential, this wonder substance alone could achieve all the carbon reductions necessary to prevent further global warming. Furthermore, the properties of biochar allow us to address three or four critical crises at once: the climate-change crisis, the energy crisis, and the food and water crises, because renewable bio-fuel is a by-product of the pyrolysis production process. Putting biochar in the soil not only fertilizes the soil, but also helps it to retain and purify water.

    Sustainable Land Development International has partnered with Ocean Mountain Ranch–a planned eco-forestry sustainable development overlooking the Pacific Ocean and the largest remaining old growth forest on the southern Oregon coast–to research and develop woody biomass utilization opportunities in cooperation with the Port Orford Community Stewardship Area under a comprehensive forest stewardship management plan, which has been approved by the Oregon Department of Forestry.

    Sustainable Land Development Initiative

    http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/02/fractal-frontier/

    Terry Mock

    August 23, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    • “According to some early estimates of biochar’s potential, this wonder substance alone could achieve all the carbon reductions necessary to prevent further global warming.”

      However biochar will never fly I guarantee it. Why? Theres no money in it. Remember cap&trade? That was the big solution because there was big money in it and at the same time it allowed governments to control whole societies and their economies. The simple truth is; he who controls carbon controls everything.

      Biochar will simply reduce atmospheric CO2. There’s little money in it and almost no government control. Biochar will be ignored. Just watch.

      klem

      August 24, 2011 at 12:29 pm

      • I have mixed emotions about Klem’s conclusion:

        “Biochar will simply reduce atmospheric CO2. There’s little money in it and almost no government control. Biochar will be ignored. Just watch.”

        The first three above statements are now true. As far as Klem’s advice to “Just watch”, SLDI prefers to promote and enable land development worldwide that balances the needs of people, planet & profit for today and future generations.

        SLDI Project Goes Carbon Negative

        http://www.triplepundit.com/2010/09/sldi-project-carbon-negative/

        Terry Mock

        August 24, 2011 at 1:10 pm

  7. ah klem – You test our host’s patience with your off topic troll bait and repetition of vacuous memes.

    arch stanton

    August 24, 2011 at 1:12 pm

  8. Klem, R. M., Scott M, A. S.

    If you had looked you would have discovered that the equation DOES explain the continuous average global temperature trajectory with its up trends and down trends for the last 115 years and counting with an accuracy of 88%. What is the best that anyone else has done?

    Dependence on regression analysis is inadequate and in this case can be very misleading. Whether it indicates an up trend or down trend depends on the time span considered. If you start it at the peak of the Medieval Warm Period or the beginning of the Holocene or 2001 it shows a downtrend. If you start at the depth of the LIA, or 1976 to now it shows an uptrend. If you look at the period from 1941 to 1976 it shows a down trend. Pick the time period and a linear regression analysis will say what ever you want. That is why I did not use it.

    It is puzzling (well not really) why you fixate on what the analysis says about the latest decade and call it cherry picking.

    Dan Pangburn

    August 24, 2011 at 5:00 pm

  9. “If you had looked you would have discovered that the equation DOES explain the continuous average global temperature trajectory…”

    Of course it does; all you did was curve fit it to the data. It has no physical basis however. It is climastrology.

    “If you start it at the peak of the Medieval Warm Period or the beginning of the Holocene or 2001 it shows a downtrend.”

    Since it is warmer now than both the peak of the MWP and the beginning of the Holocene (considerably so for that), you are wrong on both accounts. And no, it does not show a downtrend since 2001 if you take into account all the data sets. And, as I pointed out, if you start in 2000, you get about .14C/decade of warming, and if you start in 2006, you get about the same. When you cherry pick start dates in such short time frames, linear trends aren’t very useful.

    “It is puzzling (well not really) why you fixate on what the analysis says about the latest decade and call it cherry picking.”

    It’s puzzling (well, not *really*) that you still cling to your blatant cherry-picking in order to abuse the data. Keeping to the thread topic, your argument has no game.

    Robert Murphy

    August 24, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    • “It is climastrology.”

      Climastrology, that’s great! Can I use that?

      klem

      August 25, 2011 at 7:18 am

      • “Climastrology, that’s great! Can I use that?”

        You already have.

        Robert Murphy

        August 25, 2011 at 7:57 am

  10. “Klem, climate chnage is occurring and there will be solutions put into place. Do you wish to sit at that table to offer ideas or will you keep your head in the sand and then have unfavorable solutions imposed on you. So you can play the game or sit on the bench.”

    Mandia:

    You don’t understand. I’m in the game, I’ve been in the game since I first read the IPCC’s AR4 report back in the winter of 2007. The unfavorable solutions you mention were already going to be imposed on me, the unfavorable solution was Cap&Trade. That’s what I refer to when I say we’ve won, we killed Cap&Trade. That was only the first phase of the game, the imposition of any more of these brilliant solutions will only be minor. The imposition of wind turbines is minor, the imposition of carbon taxes is minor as it will require the politician to lose their job, the imposition of solar panels is minor, etc. This game which you suggest I should join has already been beaten.

    Cheers.

    klem

    August 26, 2011 at 10:21 am

  11. [...] at Science 2.0 The Policy Lass Eli at Rabbett Run Centre Daily Times Greg Laden at Science Blogs Scott Mandia the Unitarian-Universalist United Nations Office Barry Bickmore Andy Revkin at dotEarth TPM [...]


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,351 other followers

%d bloggers like this: