Local Left Bubbles — Koch-funded study finds “global warming is real” (Updated)
07/29/2012 5 Comments
Local Left does not read the rest of the Muller Op-Ed! See Below, including the Updates.
Here’s a report from Think Progress, citing a new study, as well as reports about it in the New York Times and UK Guardian:
The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study (BEST) is poised to release its findings next week on the cause of recent global warming.
UPDATE (9 pm, 7/28): A NY Times op-ed by Richard Muller, BEST’s Founder and Scientific Director, has been published, “The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic.”
Here is the money graf:
“CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”
It gets better:
Our results show that the average temperature of the earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases.
These findings are stronger than those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations group that defines the scientific and diplomatic consensus on global warming.
In short, a Koch-funded study has found that the IPCC “consensus” underestimated both the rate of surface warming and how much could be attributed to human emissions!
Here is the bottom line in the Muller OP-Ed the New York Times op-ed includes these important breaks with the global warming alarmist line:
I still find that much, if not most, of what is attributed to climate change is speculative, exaggerated or just plain wrong. I’ve analyzed some of the most alarmist claims, and my skepticism about them hasn’t changed. [Emphasis Added]
Hurricane Katrina cannot be attributed to global warming. The number of hurricanes hitting the United States has been going down, not up; likewise for intense tornadoes. Polar bears aren’t dying from receding ice, and the Himalayan glaciers aren’t going to melt by 2035. And it’s possible that we are currently no warmer than we were a thousand years ago, during the “Medieval Warm Period” or “Medieval Optimum,” an interval of warm conditions known from historical records and indirect evidence like tree rings. And the recent warm spell in the United States happens to be more than offset by cooling elsewhere in the world, so its link to “global” warming is weaker than tenuous. [Emphasis Added]
Now that puts things in a little more in perspective. Yes the planet has been warming, recovering from the Little Ice Age, but there is no proof yet that humans are responsible, only dodgy computer models.
For the last 15 years the planet has been cooling we are on the cusp of the next long term cooling period that comes about every 200 years. As you can see in this graphic, climate change on earth is cyclical and we are on the cusp of the next cooling cycle.
Stay tuned at the BEST Study has received some critical analysis by other climate scientist and has been found wanting. Judith Curry refused to be a co-author as it did not add any thing that was already know. More feed back will be posted as updates.
Update (07-29-12, 10:40) Judith Curry sent this note to New York Time’s Andrew Revkin and other journalist in response to the BEST study and Muller’s OpEd:
The BEST team has produced the best land surface temperature data set that we currently have. It is best in the sense of including the most data and extending further back in time. The data quality control and processing use objective, statistically robust techniques. That said, the scientific analyses that the BEST team has done with the new data set are controversial, including the impact of station quality on interpreting temperature trends and the urban heat island effect.
Their latest paper on the 250-year record concludes that the best explanation for the observed warming is greenhouse gas emissions. Their analysis is way oversimplistic and not at all convincing in my opinion.
There is broad agreement that greenhouse gas emissions have contributed to the warming in the latter half of the 20th century; the big question is how much of this warming can we attribute to greenhouse gas emissions. I don’t think this question can be answered by the simple curve fitting used in this paper, and I don’t see that their paper adds anything to our understanding of the causes of the recent warming. That said, I think there are two interesting results in this paper, regarding their analysis of 19th century volcanoes and the impact on climate, and also the changes to the diurnal temperature range.
Here is the real problem. CO2 is going up and temperatures are going down! If the two are related they should track much closer that shown by the real world data:
Update #2 (07-29-12, 11:00) Steven Goddard “Muller Says We Did This
Muller says that we caused the 0.7 warming seen in the pink circle on the right, even though it is completely in the noise of measurement error – and an order of magnitude smaller than natural variability.
When you can only find your solution in the noise, that is not science, it is faux science driven by a religious believe in AGW.