More AP Science Junk Published in The Union

Russ Steele

Once again we get to read more climate science junk in The Union. Yes, I know the editor’s excuse is it the AP’s bad science not The Union’s. But, on the other hand the Editor gets to choose what appears in the local news. We now have two in a row, is a third bad AP science story the prize.

If you want the facts, or the truth,  check out these links at Watts Up With That.

Update (08-09-12, 07:15)  Dr Roy Spencer takes a look at the claim that July was the hotest ever.

July 2012 Hottest Ever in the U.S.? Hmmm….I Doubt It

August 8th, 2012

Using NCDC’s own data (USHCN, Version 2), and computing area averages for the last 100 years of Julys over the 48 contiguous states, here’s what I get for the daily High temps, Low temps, and daily Averages (click for a larger image):

About these ads

About Russ Steele
Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.

58 Responses to More AP Science Junk Published in The Union

  1. Sean says:

    Actually, I think the scarriest data for alarmist is the latest sea level rise. A paper in Coastal Engineering and linked in “The Hockey Schtick” shows seal leve rise slowing down over the last 10 years. http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/08/new-paper-finds-sea-level-rise-has.html Even Gavin Schidt says sea level rise is probably the best indicator of global temperature rise and its just not doing what it was predicted to do.

  2. D. King says:

    Let me help The Union out.
    Here is a picture by National Geographic that shows a fish trapped by the gulf oil spill.
    Note that the fish is clean on one side and there are no signs of how it got there.
    How did it get there? Answer: It was put there to elicit emotions. Faked!

    Maybe do a little research on your stories before you publish them…eh!

  3. benjaminemery says:

    Russ and the deniers,
    I thought you would like to read about why you might talk yourselves out of believing the science. His book is about the actual brain of George’s beloved “Great Divide” theory, its called “The Republican Brain”. It’s really about the different world views and how they are shaped and formed in our brains.

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney

    “A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.” So wrote the celebrated Stanford University psychologist Leon Festinger (PDF), in a passage that might have been referring to climate change denial—the persistent rejection, on the part of so many Americans today, of what we know about global warming and its human causes. But it was too early for that—this was the 1950s—and Festinger was actually describing a famous case study in psychology.

    • Ben,

      You have a point, for the liberal enviromentalist with a strong belief in AGW the facts do not matter. However, over the long term people in the middle are begining to question if global warming is caused by humans and indicate they should not be too concerned if it is. Details HERE. Americans’ Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop Multiple indicators show less concern, more feelings that global warming is exaggerated

      Bottome line from the 2012 survey:

      “The slight majority of Americans support global warming as valid on a number of measures. And after peaking in 2010, public skepticism about global warming softened slightly in 2011, and remains at the lower level this year. Nevertheless, Americans remain less certain about the accuracy of global warming news coverage, about humankind’s role in causing global warming, and about the scientific consensus on the issue than they were last decade.

      Some shift in Americans’ global warming views might have been expected this year, given the near-record warm temperatures experienced this winter across much of the country — Gallup finds 79% of Americans reporting that the weather in their area was warmer than usual, though less than half of these attributed this to global warming.

      However, the fact that belief in global warming did not increase markedly suggests Americans are basing their perceptions more on the debates over scientific evidence than on the weather outside their front door.”

  4. Arthur M. Day. says:

    I gues the Pacific Northwest is not part of the globe. We have had mostly below normal temps. and above normal precip. until last weekend. And the average temp. for June and July would be even lower if the frequent heavy overcasts hadn’t elevated overnight lows.

  5. benjaminemery says:

    Arthur,
    You realize the Pacific Northwest is part of the US and Global Climate?

  6. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Emery: Global Warming means that the whole planet gets warm. The satellite temp. observations for the period of the Middle West hot spell show that almost all the rest of the planet was below normal temps. for the period. Therefore, the propagandists who said that the hot spell was evidence of Global Warming were lying…AGAIN!

    • benjaminemery says:

      Arthur,
      You only talked about the Pacific Northwest as to debunk the claim.

      • Yeah, Ben, what are you doing trusting NOAA when the evidence provided by retired spooks in RV’s collated by a right wing think tank paid weatherman sys otherwise?

      • Russ says:

        Yea, Ben do not beleive citizens scientist doing real hands on science, it may not be as accurate as some NOAA hack sitting behind a computer terminal adjusting the raw temperatues without valid justification, or ever visting the temperature collection sites, which share their space with burn barrels, tennis courts, air conditioners, acres of blacktop parking lots, miles of hot runway tarmac. HERE is a link to the Surface Station Project, judge for yourself. HERE is a link that shows 1230 Consecutive Months Of NOAA Increasingly Upwards Adjustments In Temperature. Want know why temperatues look at the graphic at the link. Judge for your self the valus of my work and the work of other citizen scientists.

      • Here is the plan: take industry money to manufacture science that makes it appear that there is debate about whether climate change is occurring, and if it is human caused. Then count on the corporate media to report the story as though there are two roughly equal sides. Then count on the ingrained avarice of human nature to lead people to keep acting as they always have because if there are “two sides” to the story they have the excuse of the controversy to rationalize not changing their behavior. Use the controversy to organize your political base based on a perceived rear to their “rights”, Low and behold, the fossil fuel industry continues to be able to exploit the resource, many of which are owned by the people, and receive fat tax subsidies to do it, creating profit at both ends. And the fear created by the controversy keeps the people who place short term profit over long term benefit in power. And simpletons like Art get to pretend that people like Russ are real scientists while saying NOAA is populated by a bunch of political hacks.

        Classic fascist propaganda.

        Cheers

      • I almost spewed over the SteveF screed. I guess his position of Armageddon because the lie of man made climate warming is not a scare tactic but the opposing science showing it is a hoax is a scare tactic and fascist. His logic is about the third grade level in this debate. But, hey, the libs have dumbed down our kids in the education system and that is who SteveF is appealing too. Same level of intelligence.

  7. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Emery: NOAA long ago ceased to be a credible source on the climate issue. You might as well quote Pravda or Izvestia. NOAA relates to honest scientists as a prostitute relates to your faithful, lawful, wedded wife.

  8. Arthur M. Day. says:

    I think we would all appreciate a detailed list of all the fossil fuel powered comforts and conveniences Mr. Frisch and Mr. Emery have renounced now that they are True Believing Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming Alarmists. And that’s True Believing in the full Eric Hoffer sense.

  9. You will never get it Arthur. They are hypocrites. Do as I say, not as I do.

  10. Arthur M. Day. says:

    S’okay, I love the sound of crickets.

  11. Ben Emery says:

    Why is it when someone believes what a vast majority of scientist of their field say we are asked to prove we are living by pre-industrial revolution technology? It really is a retort of someone who has little to add to the dialogue. Once again change the subject to attacking the individual instead of the issue.

    The smart idiot effect

  12. BenE, it is not the people who think the climate “science” stuff is a hoax who are doing the attacking. Obama and Jerry Brown have hotlines for people to turn in to the authorities those who disagree. I guess you have missed the thousands of articles claiming the folks who disagree are “traitors” and should be put into a gulag.

    The list of scientists who supposedly formed a “consensus” is offset by the list of those who disagree. You choose the “yes men” grant seekers, we support those who oppose the hoax because it attacks freedom and is a lie.

  13. Steve Frisch says:

    Meanwhile: “The global average temperature in July was the fourth-warmest on record and marked the 329th consecutive month with a worldwide temperature above the 20th century average, according to federal data released Wednesday.”

    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/243885-noaa-july-was-fourth-hottest-on-record-worldwide

    And it was the hottest month on record ever in the US:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/science/earth/july-was-hottest-month-ever-recorded-in-us.html

    Leading to, “A hot July also contributed to the warmest 12-month period ever recorded in the United States, the statistics showed.

    Climatologists at the agency noted that by the end of the month, about 63 percent of the nation was experiencing drought conditions, which contributed to the high temperatures.”

    Which led to the shutdown of the Millstone nuclear power plant in Connecticut due to warm water in Long Island Sound, knocking out 1/3 of the power in the regional grid.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jvhb6AzT7iSI3mXMDIFqG_R1_vhg?docId=d07d2ec0216d40269e1b1e22b35e252f

    But then again, NOAA is just a bunch of commies, the science is not accurate, the risk is nothing to worry about and we should just go on sucking down carbon based fuel and leave the consequences to the next generation.

    I am wondering when people will wake up and realize that the choices we face are tough; either we leave future generations with an environmental disaster of biblical proportion or we take action now and accept the fact that changing our practices is not going to be free.

    A true conservative would accept their responsibility today instead of passing it on to their grandchildren.

  14. Todd Juvinall says:

    BenE, I’ll let Russ educate you on the ice caps.

  15. Ben Emery says:

    Why have RV Russ educate me, let me hear your great comprehension of an issue you have no idea about. Here are two points for you to look up if you want to start educating yourself not relying RV Russ. Here is really where the debate falls.

    -Continue profits for status quo
    vs
    – Taking personal responsibility for a unsustainable economic model that is based upon the burning of fossil fuels with a increasing population.

    Just think in 1900 there was around 1.5 billion people on the planet. Today 2.5 billion people live in the big two developing nations alone, not to mention the already developed population on the planet. Your sources see mega profits my sources see a disaster developing and becoming a reality.

    * Water turning from a solid to a liquid, which will then turn into a gas evaporating into the atmosphere creating a disturbance in weather patterns and intensifying storms

    http://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/geol204/oceanatmos.htm

    * North Atlantic Current, which if altered could create massive changes causing irrevocable damage. Changing the climate of established regions of the world would cost millions and millions of lives and literally immeasurable of wealth/ money.

    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/05mar_arctic/

  16. Steve Frisch says:

    Meanwhile: “The global average temperature in July was the fourth-warmest on record and marked the 329th consecutive month with a worldwide temperature above the 20th century average, according to federal data released Wednesday.”

    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/243885-noaa-july-was-fourth-hottest-on-record-worldwide

    • Rebuttal: ‘NOAA picks a cold period for the baseline, adjusts recent temperatures upwards and fails to account for UHI. The odds of them reporting honest temperatures are zero out of infinity. Perhaps Seth could explain why half of the lower 48 US states set their all time high temperature record during the 1930s’

      • Russ I remember the hot spell in the late 90’s when the Fair was going. I work the Republican booth every year and the Friday night I was working the power went out. The state grid was overloaded from the AC use and they shut the Fair down. The only time over the last twenty five years. The lefty’s called that global warming caused. Then we had 4 feet of snow the following winter and the lefties called that weather. I am soooo confused!

  17. Steve Frisch says:

    And it was the hottest month on record ever in the US:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/science/earth/july-was-hottest-month-ever-recorded-in-us.html

    Leading to, “A hot July also contributed to the warmest 12-month period ever recorded in the United States, the statistics showed.

    Climatologists at the agency noted that by the end of the month, about 63 percent of the nation was experiencing drought conditions, which contributed to the high temperatures.”

    • Steven, here are some facts: July 2012 not a record breaker according to data from the new NOAA/NCDC U.S. Climate Reference Network

      The old network is contaminated by urban heat islands, and the new network is in more rural locations, not next to heat sources like tennis courts and black top parking lots.

      Here is an example: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/stroud_uscrn_station.jpg?w=600&h=451

      Here are the results from the more rural network:
      USA Monthly Mean for July 2012:   75.72°F 
(111 stations)
      USA Monthly Average for July 2012:   75.51°F 
(111 stations)
      USA Monthly Mean for July 2012:   75.74°F 
(114 stations, 3 w/ partial missing data, difference  0.02)
      USA Monthly Average for July 2012:   75.55°F 
(114 stations, 3 w/ partial missing data, difference  0.04)
      ============================
      Comparison to NOAA’s announcement today:
      Using the old network, NOAA says the USA Average Temperature for July 2012 is: 77.6°F
      Using the NOAA USCRN data, the USA Average Temperature for July 2012 is: 75.5°F
      The difference between the old problematic network and new USCRN is 2.1°F cooler.
      This puts July 2012, according to the best official climate monitoring network in the USA at 1.9°F below the  77.4°F July 1936 USA average temperature in the NOAA press release today, not a record by any measure.

      These facts brought to you by research conducted by RV Russ

      • Ben Emery says:

        Do you like that nickname RV Russ? I think it has a nice ring to it. RV Russ or how about RV Rebane, I like Russ better.

      • Steve Frisch says:

        Thanks but I think I will stick with the official NOAA data, which they have collected since 1895, instead of a cherry picked subset of the data they used to state that July was the hottest month on record.

        http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/

        The NOAA/NCDC U.S. Climate Reference Network data is only 111-114 stations out of more than 1000 data collection points, including water temperatures records. The “Watts Up With That” interpretation of data collected from the RV does not meet any acceptable scientific standard.

        But even more interesting is how does one separate urban data from rural data? The temperature is calculated from an average of all the data, so if we create urban heat islands, to the people who live in the urban heat islands, the effect is that the temperature is higher. The health effects are the same as if they were higher. The increased incidence of respiratory problems, heat stroke and all other heat related effects are the same. Are you seriously saying “hey it is not really warmer because its only warmer where 75% of the people live”?

        The effect on Long Island Sound was certainly still there–and a nuclear power plant is shut down because of it–costing ratepayers millions of dollars every day it is closed.

        The point I am making is that if one is going to count the cost of regulation one needs to compare it to the real cost of not regulating……it goes both ways.

      • Russ says:

        Really? Anthony use NOAA data, from NOAA sites and a network that was designed to eliminate the UHI impact, but NOAA and NASA keep report the results of the old network that is UHI contaminated. It is OK Steven, if you choose to believe the political motivated adjusted facts, it is OK with me if you want to promote the fraud, but I have give the other readers of the blog the option of knowing the truth. July was not the warmest month. NOAA’s own data proves it!

      • Steve Frisch says:

        That should of course read the “cheery picked subset of the data YOU used to state that July was not the hottest month”.

        Your case that you used NOAA data is ridiculous–you picked 111 out of more than 1000 data points normally used by NOAA>

        Plus, you actually did not answer my question or comment about heat islands. What the heck difference does it make if you are 65 and suffer from CHF or COPD? if the data point selected is inaccurate and you live in a heat island the effect is the same. We created the heat island effect, and it is perfectly appropriate that is be factored into the actual human effects of climate change.

    • Russ says:

      Man made global warming started much earlier than 329 months ago. NOAA’s retroactive data adjustments tampering fraud now reaches back well over a century.
      NOAA Adjustments

      • Well the 111 were the highest quality stations that NOAA has. Would you rather pick the 111 worst stations? The USHCNv2 only has 111 stations.

      • Steve Frisch says:

        That is your opinion Russ, not NOAA’s. I am saying that I think NOAA is better qualified to crunch the data, determine if there are outside factors, and make adjustments, based on the facts. In short, you, Allan, et. al. are too biased to do so. Your sword is planted in the denier ground, and you will never give it up, nor will you allow any finding from NOAA to go unchallenged, whether warranted or not, because your entire case rests on the premise that there is a global conspiracy on the part of scientists, including NOAA, to deceive the public. The only way your opinion can prevail is if the world adopts your conspiracy theory. No amount of oil and coal money flooding into the Heartland Institute, Watts Up With That, or

        I am saying that the world, watching the shrinking of sea ice, raising temperatures, gradual saltwater intrusion into low lying areas, drought, and flood, and experiencing the food, fuel and material shortages that will result from climate change, and the health impacts of climate change, will reject your theory. The consequences of climate change will crush your argument, Unfortunately, for many, that will be too late. But not for you, because you will be dead. This is where your conservative philosophy is failing you. As a conservative you should care about the future instead of passing the burdens of dealing with this problem on solely to future generations.

  18. Steve Frisch says:

    Which led to the shutdown of the Millstone nuclear power plant in Connecticut due to warm water in Long Island Sound, knocking out 1/3 of the power in the regional grid.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jvhb6AzT7iSI3mXMDIFqG_R1_vhg?docId=d07d2ec0216d40269e1b1e22b35e252f

    But then again, NOAA is just a bunch of commies, the science is not accurate, the risk is nothing to worry about and we should just go on sucking down carbon based fuel and leave the consequences to the next generation.

    I am wondering when people will wake up and realize that the choices we face are tough; either we leave future generations with an environmental disaster of biblical proportion or we take action now and accept the fact that changing our practices is not going to be free.

    A true conservative would accept their responsibility today instead of passing it on to their grandchildren.

  19. Ben Emery says:

    Steve,
    I have a comment awaiting moderation with two links from liberal bias .edu and nasa. Neither one has to do with GW/ CC directly but a couple of points about the Polar Ice Caps and how their melting is and possibly affect the earths weather patterns.

  20. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Among the latter refuges of propagandists is: Argumentum ad verucundiam. Nearer the bitter end is argumentum ad hominem.
    I’m enjoying the crickets while I wait for your list of comforts and conveniences renounced.

  21. Ben Emery says:

    Art,
    That is a ridiculous question but I will answer it anyway. Nobody advocates for complete abandonment of fossil fuels, which makes it a ridiculous question. But here is what I have done over my entire adult life reducing my impact. For years I didn’t drive a car, I only took jobs I could walk or bike to work, I lived outdoors for years without power or running water, I still walk or ride my bike as much as possible, I purchase as much as I can from local business cutting down on transportation, we grow much of our own food, 90% of my annual clothing budget is spent at thrift stores, our family bought a zero emission hybrid when the first occasion came up, I try and plant at least 20 trees a year, we never use AC and rarely use heat in our well insulated home, I burn candles as much as possible instead of use electric lights, and we always organized carpools with our kids schools and sport teams. I am sure there are many more examples of how we and I have tried to reduce our impact. So I hope that takes the smugness out of your ridiculous question.

    • Art, I thought your question was spot on. Human have tried their darndest to get out of the cave and live a long and healthy life but there are people who want to return to the cave. I love the motors that power the world and I just love my SUV. I am traveling to LaMalfa’s BBQ Sunday and I’ll have five passengers. Lots of room.

      I am glad that fossil fuels are used for motors because I like to hear the vroom vroom when I fire them up.

      The planet has room for all kinds of people and all kinds of things to do and live by. Unfortunately liberals want us all to live like BenE says he lives and that is just plain ridiculous. I just wonder where these liberal folks get their hepatitis shots?

      • Ben Emery says:

        “What the mind doesn’t understand, it worships or fears.”
        ― Alice Walker

        “Our wretched species is so made that those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.”
        ― Voltaire

  22. Arthur M. Day. says:

    I love the smell of over the top self righteousness in the evening.

  23. Ben Emery says:

    Art,
    Typical, you ask for a list and I give you a list and then I become self righteous.

  24. Arthur M. Day. says:

    How many miles per pound of coal does your “zero emission” vehicle achieve? Even Puget Sound Energy reports 31% coal electricity in it’s pie chart.

  25. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Emery, the selfrighteousness showed up when you called me a simpleton and my question ridiculous.

  26. Ben Emery says:

    Art,
    Your question is ridiculous, where has anyone said we need to get rid of all fossil fuels? Your question implies that is the case, which makes it ridiculous.

  27. ARThur, U think their was some NGO in Nevada City called APPLE which stood for a “post” fossil fuel life. You are correct, most of the liberals thought it was great. I think even Mr. Emery did.

  28. Ben Emery says:

    Todd,
    APPLE and their couple thousand dollars in tax payer is equal to the $550 billion dollars in global subsides for energy industry. Yep that makes it an even playing field to assume the use of fossil fuels are on under serious attack.

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/055e6a5a-71cb-11df-8eec-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1f9bY3e12

    • BenE, when a liberal loses his argument he changes the subject. You said Art’s point was ridiculous based on your statement and I disproved that. Then when confronted with proof, you dodge and change the argument to some money issue. You lost, accept it and move on. Oh, admit you supported APPLE, or have you changed your mind?

  29. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Emery, how does asking you what comforts and conveniences you have renounced come out as demanding that all of us end the use of fossil fuels?
    Sir, you need to have your mental circuitry traced out, I think you have some wires going to the wrong places.
    And do you have an answer on the miles per pound of coal question?

  30. Arthur M. Day. says:

    This cricket serenade rought to you by Mr. Steven Frisch.

    • Todd Juvinall says:

      Art, he doesn’t know anything but he sure can type up a storm and copy/paste on any topic. Wow!

  31. Just wondering how many have seen this graphic from Dr. Christy at the UAH. It’s a plot of the three scenarios NASA-GISS’ James Hansen presented in the late ’80’s (modest CO2 emissions growth, steady CO2 emissions and drastic reductions) vs. the surface temps as measured by satellites and stitched together by both UAH and RSS:

    The UAH and RSS datasets are consistent and show a lower temperature than even the drastic reduction scenario and most scientifically minded folk would consider that fairly strong evidence the Hansen simulations were not valid and should not have been taken seriously.

    The Christy posting that contains that graphic is here

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2012/08/fun-with-summer-statistics-part-2-the-northern-hemisphere-land/

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.

%d bloggers like this: