A balmy 32* here this morning.  High to be 50*.

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:09 AM, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark
> about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over
> global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies
> (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James
> Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global
> temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on
> record.
>
> This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal
> snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great
> Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official
> news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm
> ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
> registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures
> for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114
> years.
>
> So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps
> seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to
> 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two
> leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit,
> began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing
> discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of
> temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on
> October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply
> been carried over and repeated two months running.
>
> The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs -
> run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the
> Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the
> notorious "hockey stick" graph - GISS began hastily revising its
> figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for
> the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a
> new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were
> showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that
> three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same
> time last year.
>
> A GISS spokesman lamely explained that the reason for the error in the
> Russian figures was that they were obtained from another body, and
> that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control
> over the data it was supplied with. This is an astonishing admission:
> the figures published by Dr Hansen's institute are not only one of the
> four data sets that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
> (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming, but they are
> the most widely quoted, since they consistently show higher
> temperatures than the others.
>
> Yet last week's latest episode is far from the first time Dr Hansen's
> methodology has been called in question. In 2007 he was forced by Mr
> Watts and Mr McIntyre to revise his published figures for US surface
> temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was
> not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s.
>
> Another of his close allies is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the
> IPCC, who recently startled a university audience in Australia by
> claiming that global temperatures have recently been rising "very much
> faster" than ever, in front of a graph showing them rising sharply in
> the past decade. In fact, as many of his audience were aware, they
> have not been rising in recent years and since 2007 have dropped.
>
> Dr Pachauri, a former railway engineer with no qualifications in
> climate science, may believe what Dr Hansen tells him. But whether, on
> the basis of such evidence, it is wise for the world's governments to
> embark on some of the most costly economic measures ever proposed, to
> remedy a problem which may actually not exist, is a question which
> should give us all pause for thought.
>
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml
> >
>


-- 
*~@):~{>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to