Quite aside from the realclimatescientistsmoothingalgorithmparameterselectioncontroversy, another interesting aspect of Figure 3 of the Copnhagen Synthesis Report is the cone of model projections. Today I’ll show you how to do a similar comparison for an AR4 model of your choice. Unlike Rahmstorf, I’ll show how this is done, complete with turnkey code. I realize that this […]
Many CA readers have probably been checking out some interesting post at Lucia’s about Stefan Rahmstorf’s opportunistic smoothing of temperature observations in Copenhagen. See here here and here at Lucia’s. Also see David Stockwell’s recent post here and his recent E&E paper on Rahmstorf et al (Science 2007) (Rahmstorf here). Also see the recent Copenhagen […]
Continuing the petty practice of refusing to cite HS critics, Johann h. Jungclaus, writing in Nature Geoscience, “Lessons from the past millennium”, discusses the “debate about the ‘hockey-stick’ curve” without citing the critical MM articles: Knowledge of past climate evolution is essential for understanding natural climate variability. The debate about the ‘hockey-stick’ curve — a […]
In my last post, I observed that NOAA’s Talking Points applied their new “adjustments” to supposedly prove that NOAA’s negligent administration of the USHCN network did not “matter”. In order to illustrate the effect of the new methods in this post, I’ll compare the new adjustments (post-TOBS) to the old adjustments (post-TOBS) on a “good” […]
The NOAA Talking Points memo falls well short of a “full, true and plain disclosure” standard – aside from the failure to appropriately credit Watts (2009). They presented the following graphic that purported to show that NOAA’s negligent administration of the USHCN station network did not “matter”, describing the stations as follows: Two national time […]
Menne et al (J Clim 2009) reported that there were 62 station deletions and 59 station additions from the most recent roster (which itself had been modified from the original USHCN in the mid-1980s. Menne et al: Since the 1996 release (Easterling et al. 1996), numerous station closures and relocations again necessitated a revision of […]
Speaking of which, WBZ-TV in Boston reported on the surface stations issue here . The image looked familiar to me.
Anthony reports today on a NOAA “Talking Points” document which purports to rebut Anthony’s Is The U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?, without deigning to cite Watts, A. (2009). Is The U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable? Downloaded from http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/surfacestationsreport_spring09.pdf. or using Anthony’s name. They seem to have adopted the Team tactic (Hansen in particular) of refusing […]
A couple of months ago, I posted on the EPA Endangerment Finding. In Canada, the government would just go ahead and pass the regulations without the long U.S. regulatory processes. In practical terms, some odd coalitions can form for specific policies between people who are worried about energy supply or the impact of energy imports […]
As CA readers know, Phil Jones keeps his CRU data secret. Embarrassingly, the UK Met Office relies on this secret data and says that it is unable to provide this supporting data for the most relied upon temperature data set in the world. Their statements in response to FOI requests as to what they actually […]
Climate Audit 