{"id":2194,"date":"2009-12-08T23:03:59","date_gmt":"2009-12-08T23:03:59","guid":{"rendered":"0"},"modified":"2009-12-08T23:03:59","modified_gmt":"2009-12-08T23:03:59","slug":"mo_agw","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/?p=2194","title":{"rendered":"Mo&#8217; AGW"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In honor of the amazingly stupid (politically, economically, and environmentally) EPA decision, here&#8217;s some interesting comments about AGW.<\/p>\n<p>At the &#8216;climate denialist&#8217; blog WattsUpWithThat, blogger <a href=\"http:\/\/wattsupwiththat.com\/2009\/12\/08\/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero\/\" target=\"browser\">Willis Eschenbach just posted an interesting analysis<\/a> of some Australian raw climate data.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ll comment on that in a sec, but wanted to highlight this:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>There are three main global temperature datasets. One is at the CRU, Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, where we&#8217;ve been trying to get access to the raw numbers. One is at NOAA\/GHCN, the Global Historical Climate Network. The final one is at NASA\/GISS, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The three groups take raw data, and they &#8220;homogenize&#8221; it to remove things like when a station was moved to a warmer location and there&#8217;s a 2C jump in the temperature. The three global temperature records are usually called CRU, GISS, and GHCN. Both GISS and CRU, however, get almost all of their raw data from GHCN. All three produce very similar global historical temperature records from the raw data.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>OK, this is &#8211; if true &#8211; the answer to one of the questions I hoped to get to in my &#8216;pet project.&#8217; Without making any judgment on the quality of the datasets, the interesting issue is that if AGW scientists rely on one sole &#8216;master dataset&#8217; rather than heterogeneous sets of data &#8211; and if the social pressure is to conform to that one master dataset &#8211; the risk of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.windsofchange.net\/archives\/exposure_meters_and_climate_science.html\" target=\"browser\">social drift and groupthink<\/a> get raised substantially.<\/p>\n<p>Now I&#8217;m not convinced that&#8217;s true &#8211; one reason I want to do my project is so that I can rule it in or out. But it is to me a vastly important issue, and one that needs to be exposed to the light of common understanding as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ll make one more comment.<\/p>\n<p>Critics like the bloggers at WattsUpWithThat and Climate Audit tend to do posts like this that tear into some &#8216;nugget&#8217; of information. When I go read Climate Progress or Real Climate, what I&#8217;d love to see more of (and I&#8217;ve seen some) is someone taking on the claims made in this post and making an explanation of why it is that the argument there doesn&#8217;t hold water.<\/p>\n<p>Here&#8217;s the core of Eschenbach&#8217;s claim:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i>What on earth justifies that adjustment? How can they do that? We have five different records covering Darwin from 1941 on. They all agree almost exactly. Why adjust them at all? They&#8217;ve just added a huge artificial totally imaginary trend to the last half of the raw data! Now it looks like the IPCC diagram in Figure 1, all right &#8211; but a six degree per century trend? And in the shape of a regular stepped pyramid climbing to heaven? What&#8217;s up with that?<\/p>\n<p>Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style &#8211; they are indisputable evidence that the &#8220;homogenized&#8221; data has been changed to fit someone&#8217;s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Take a look at his (detailed, thorough) post and post your own comment on what you think it means.<br \/>\n&#8211;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Are there really only three global temperature datasets?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2194"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2194"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2194\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2194"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2194"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2194"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}