Noble Prize winner -- Global warming -- Koch Brothers (hard core deniers) oops

So Berkley Lab working with a grant partly funded (about 25%) by a Koch foundation - does one of the most intensive statistical analysis yet -- and using a vastly larger data set it tracks closely with other studies by NOAA, NASA and Hadley - remember climategate.

Granted this has not been peer reviewed -- kind of a sneak peek, but judging from the participants in the study it appears that it will be peer reviewed and pass.

Pretty much invalidates climategate, so quit bringing it up please, it makes you sound ignorant -- unless denial for you is ideology rather than science, then carry on but smart people will laugh and point.

The LOL is that the Kochs bought some data that they couldn't influence -- it will cause the pain because they are ideologues.

Actually the study apparently was conceived by a scientist who's presupposition was that the government scientists were not being as open with their methodology as science requires. And as science requires the data did not support the presupposition. DATA RULES.

The study was initiated by Berkeley physicist Richard Muller, who was concerned that government researchers weren’t being as open as possible with their methods. He gathered together a team of scientists, and they used data from 39,000 temperature stations around the world, far more than the previous studies. They have put all their data and methodology online for anyone to investigate.

Does this change a lot? No, but it validates studies that the deniers have been saying are flawed based on right wing propaganda.

What this will mean is nothing, people who deny global warming is happening because -- fill in the blank -- will not be swayed because theirs is an agenda and facts can not sway those committed to an ideological agenda. They can not be ignored, because the voice of the ignorant is often loud and surly. A fools tail full of fire and fury..... But they can be safely ridiculed and they should be. They are not skeptics, a skeptic reserves an opinion until the facts persuade them, they do not hamstring data with emotion.

So-called ‘sceptics’ should now drop their thoroughly discredited claims that the increase in global average temperature could be attributed to the impact of growing cities. [...] It is now time for an apology from all those, including US presidential hopeful Rick Perry, who have made false claims that the evidence for global warming has been faked by climate scientists.

There will be no apology from any one one the right -- it would not fit the agenda.

From Murdoch's Wall Street Journal -- the incident that the deniers use to bogify all of the data.

online.wsj.com...

A study that verified the bogified data

berkeleyearth.org...

berkeleyearth.org...

www.berkeleyearth.org...

Right wing candates realizing the data that they criticize is actually real data.

-- Sorry link broken 404 error

What the report states is simply that the globe is warming. What the report doesn't state is why. It highlights the fact the planet goes through many phases of warming and cooling and we are currently in one of these. It does not state that this is down to mankind, equally it does not state that it isn't down to mankind.

At the end of the day, whatever spin people may wish to put upon it, the sun is responsible directly for 99.9% of any warming or cooling that the planet goes through.

Is mankind responsible? No

Is mankind helping the warming? Yes, but helping and not causing (important difference).

This is what i don't get about the global warming thing - why do people simply not grasp that the sun is responsible for everything to do with with life on this planet, including the temperatures that we live in?

We should be far less concerned about the warming and far more concerned with the pollution that we are responsible for...........

I love that the Koch brothers helped fund this because they thought the scientist would support them as he had publicly expressed doubt about the previous studies' methods.

I wonder if they will attack him now because he told the truth and that probably isn't what they were expecting.

No one, and I mean no one is denying that climate change is occurring. Quite the opposite really.

I seriously hate how people now have a disconnect with the fact that anthropogenic global warming is what was debunked, in case you have forgotten, we were all going to be taxed for breathing and become enemies of the state for "destroying" the earth with our breathe. its like our memory of this whole event has been distorted to the point that the deniers were saying that climate change doesn't exist, when that was never the case. Your OP is dishonest.

Originally posted by no time
its like our memory of this whole event has been distorted to the point that the deniers were saying that climate change doesn't exist, when that was never the case. Your OP is dishonest.

Right...

Global Warming Is Not Happening by Christopher Monckton
There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998 by Bob Carter
Global Cooling Continues by James Taylor


...and I could easily google up 1000 more.




A lot of the hullaballoo over this Berkeley study comes from the fact that when it was first announced - deniers championed it as inevitable vindication of their claims that the global temperature record has been distorted and manipulated to exaggerate global warming, "hide the decline", and all that idiotic tinfoil junk.


They were dancing in the streets because this study was headed by Richard Muller - a notorious climate skeptic, and endorsed by shills like Anthony Watts - who has formed an online cult around his claims that the surface temperature record is a total alarmist farce basically.


Now the results are in and it turns out there never was any decline to hide, Muller has apparently become a climate convert, the tinfoil brigade is screaming that the "warmists" (as opposed to, you know, the facts) must've "gotten to him", and Watts is doing everything he can to wash his hands of his previous claims and bury his head back up his own butt before eating even a slice of humble pie.



But goal-post movement and selective memory distortion are absolute staples of climate denier dementia, so really nothing new here - other than the fact one of them apparently actually had the scruples to admit they were wrong for once.

(That single handedly makes this the most incredible global warming story I've ever read on here actually).

reply to post by no time


Actually there are many many many people and many people who have power who say that the earth is not warming that this happens all the time -- -- that is what the whole thing about the emails was about. Change like this dosen't all the time and this time it is going to be a game changer.

You know - I heard your complaints before - it was in the 60s and 70s - the compliant was we can't not pollute the water without destroying the economy. The water is a lot cleaner now. We can't clean up cars because it will cost to much and make cars undrivable. The air is cleaner now and last weekend I drove a 600 hp car through the mountains. Now the cry is that we can't limit the CO2 because - a litany of excuses ending with because liberals and scientists are idiots. Same tune different words.

To ignore the problem is not the answer particularly if the journey cleans air and makes things run more efficiently - that is how science particularly long term science works. The problem now is by listening to the people who refuse to listen we may have waited to long.

Don't think all this stuff works - take a trip to China or Russia or the Philippines or India or any number of third world countries. Take note of the yellow skies and nasty rivers. (dont look to closely at the rivers.) It is going to be hard to get them on board but does that make it right not to try. The only sure fire way to fail is to not ever try..

You have to ask what is the reason for your intransigence? Is it ideology or agenda.

Is it the money -- heard that about going to the moon -- We are sending all that money to the moon - what a waste. You know - there is not one single dollar on the moon. All the money spent went to people who built factories bought cars and houses and boats and diapers and food and furnature and tvs and visited the doctor and the dentist and the local bodega. Not one red cent is on the moon -- just a few pounds of scrap metal.

The short sighted complained about it then the same short sighted are complaining about co2 control now.

I guess we just think in different time frames - probably a side effect of being old.

If you read my post you will see that I didn't say that this study changed things, it just verifies things that we already knew and perhaps we can move on to better identifying the problem, big problems are not solved with simple slogans and this is a big problem.

reply to post by mc_squared

...and I could easily google up 1000 more

But can you Google up 1000 saying climate change is not happening?

You did not read what was said - as usual. In any event the original data has long since been 'lost' as admitted by CRU so any study is going to prove the point as the fixed data was designed to do.

reply to post by PuterMan


And you're trying to cop out by fumbling over semantics - as usual.


Climate change and global warming are part of the same thing, this is why they're used interchangeably. Climate change is a term here that simply describes regional subsets of a rise in mean global temperature, so arguing that global warming isn't happening is akin to saying the climate isn't changing now either.


And this was exactly the denier mantra up until the last few years of really obvious extreme weather events - or at least, part of it - since they tend to just throw anything they can at the wall and hope it sticks (it's not happening, it is happening but it's not caused by us, it is caused by us but it's good for plants, etc, etc).


This hot mess of ignorant self-contradicting memes is so common amongst typical denier-bots that Coby Beck organized his 'How To Talk to a Climate Skeptic' series under this very format:

Stages of Denial



Meanwhile - you're the one not reading what is written here (as usual).

This BEST study was commisioned to independently answer the question of whether or not the observed mean rise of the last 50 years - again: global warming - was indeed real, or just an artifact of bad station siting, data manipulation, or whatever other excuses you want to make up.

Anthony Watts has long preached that it's all a big ruse concocted by carefully selected station sites that skew the data towards a warming bias - a claim that you yourself have repeatedly parroted on this site PuterMan (wanna see how many of those I can google up?)

And now that the results of this study show the global warming trend is indeed real and was not manipulated - all the skeptics are running around re-shuffling their positions once again and trying to save face.

In your case it's particularly bizarre - since you seem to now be simultaneously trying to jump into the "none of us ever said that!" boat, while then immediately spitting another one of these totally false memes in the very next sentence.

In any event the original data has long since been 'lost' as admitted by CRU so any study is going to prove the point as the fixed data was designed to do.

The CRU never lost the raw data. It's raw data. That means it belongs to the original weather stations and record keepers, and was never the CRU's to lose in the first place.

Conservative media hype misleading report suggesting CRU destroyed raw climate data
Scientists Return Fire at Climate Skeptics in 'Destroyed Data' Dispute

Meanwhile read the links available in the OP. The Berkeley study has made all their raw data and code freely available here and here.



So seriously - trying using the slightest shred of critical thinking instead of just automatically regurgitating whatever garbage you read on wattsupwiththat.com, and maybe you'll finally figure out how much you're the one getting played by these blatant oil-funded sheisters.



Or you know - just continue shuffling around to whatever "stage of denial" allows you to once again retreat from the facts...

reply to post by Flavian


Oh come on here!

You're just passing the blame onto nature itself. There's no way that the SUN (yes, the #ing SUN!) could have caused all this warming on its own.

People have to learn to stop denying what is right in front of their eyes.

Nevermind who/what caused global warming. Now's the time to act, not bicker.

reply to post by The Sword


What? Do you seriously believe that the sun is not responsible for pretty much everything in our part of the universe?

I have never doubted climate change and i have also never doubted that is a natural phenomenon. Are we speeding it up? Probably, yes we are. Even if we halt all of our practices and find some magic way to re set the clock, will it make any difference to the planet heating up? No, not at all. Look at the data, we are constantly in cycles of warm / cold.

Like i said in the post, we should be far more concerned about the things that we can actually make a difference with - stop polluting the planet, come up with greener energies, etc.

Arguing about whether or not the planet is heating up is totally irrelevant to the actual issues at hand that we all face.

So, once again, yes the planet is heating up. Blame the shiny gassy thing that you see in the sky every day that allows you to exist in any state at all

reply to post by spyder550


Bit of an oops for the Koch brothers.

Did you know they financed studies that claimed that acid rain didn't exist and that smog prevents skin cancer?