Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Space, the environment, new discoveries and new uses for old ones
Post Reply
User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by kramer » Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:25 pm

A good article from Judith Curry, a climate scientist at Georgia Tech:
link
Some excerpts:

"It is obvious that there has been deletion of adverse data in figures shown IPCC AR3 and AR4, and the 1999 WMO document. Not only is this misleading, but it is dishonest (I agree with Muller on this one)."

. . .

McIntyre’s analysis is sufficiently well documented that it is difficult to imagine that his analysis is incorrect in any significant way. If his analysis is incorrect, it should be refuted. I would like to know what the heck Mann, Briffa, Jones et al. were thinking when they did this and why they did this, and how they can defend this, although the emails provide pretty strong clues. Does the IPCC regard this as acceptable? I sure don’t.

Can anyone defend “hide the decline”? I would much prefer to be wrong in my interpretation, but I fear that I am not.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18155
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by Fordama » Thu Feb 24, 2011 8:14 pm

She did a nice study on the long term loss of Arctic ice due to the long term warming at the poles.

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by kramer » Fri Feb 25, 2011 6:43 am

Fordama wrote:She did a nice study on the long term loss of Arctic ice due to the long term warming at the poles.

Fordama
"Long term warming?" How long term was she referring to?
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18155
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by Fordama » Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:50 am

kramer wrote:
"Long term warming?" How long term was she referring to?
Read her work--it's on her home page. That's how you found out about her, right?

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by kramer » Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:24 pm

Fordama wrote: Read her work--it's on her home page. That's how you found out about her, right?

Fordama
Did you even read it yourself?
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
AsIfYouKnew
Posts: 7264
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:01 am

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by AsIfYouKnew » Fri Feb 25, 2011 1:28 pm

here is a nice little tidbit from one of her works:

http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/climate/tow ... trust.html

In their misguided war against the skeptics, the CRU emails reveal that core research values became compromised. Much has been said about the role of the highly politicized environment in providing an extremely difficult environment in which to conduct science that produces a lot of stress for the scientists. There is no question that this environment is not conducive to science and scientists need more support from their institutions in dealing with it. However, there is nothing in this crazy environment that is worth sacrificing your personal or professional integrity. And when your science receives this kind of attention, it means that the science is really important to the public. Therefore scientists need to do everything possible to make sure that they effectively communicate uncertainty, risk, probability and complexity, and provide a context that includes alternative and competing scientific viewpoints. This is an important responsibility that individual scientists and particularly the institutions need to take very seriously.
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift

http://www.civilityinamerica.org/en/index.html

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by Luca » Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:54 pm

Which to me also means admitting that "We don't really know. We don't have the tools and don't have the technology to explain past climate evolution or accurately predict the future."

I've always wondered, if there's not a consensus on where we are now, how we can be so sure what the situation was 500 or 1000 years ago. They ran these numbers off their tongues so glibly that I assumed there must be some sort of science I was unfamiliar with that allowed them to make these estimates with such confidence. I knew that they relied on tree rings but I could not believe that would be all there is to it. As though you can measure tree rings in certain localized areas and make estimates on the entire climate based on it.

There was a passage in the movie "Midway":

Captain Garth: How much can you decipher?
Commander Rochefort: Fifteen percent.
Captain Garth: Really decipher?
Commander Rochefort: Ten percent.
Captain Garth: Ten percent? That's one word in ten, Joe! You're *guessing*!
Commander Rochefort: [slightly hurt] We like to call it "analysis."

Or "guessing" based on an inadequate state of the art. Luca

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by kramer » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:26 pm

Luca wrote:Which to me also means admitting that "We don't really know. We don't have the tools and don't have the technology to explain past climate evolution or accurately predict the future."
The way they do it is to run their climate models on known past climates and then see how well they predict what they know happened. I think this is a good way to check their models. However, I came upon a 1997 article in science magazine and climate modeling is quite a daunting task. Here are some of the excerpts of what was said regarding climate modeling:
Green forecasting still cloudy, Science; May 16, 1997, pg. 1040

But IPCC scientists now say that neither the public nor many scientists appreciate how many if's, and's, and but's peppered the report. "It's unfortunate that many people read the media hype before they read the [IPCC] chapter" on the detection of greenhouse warming, says climate modeler Benjamin Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, the lead author of the chapter. "I think the caveats are there. We say quite clearly that few scientists would say the attribution issue was a done deal."

. . .

The effort to simulate climate in a computer faces two kinds of obstacles: lack of computer power and a still very incomplete picture of how real-world climate works. The climate forecasters' basic strategy is to build a mathematical model that recreates global climate processes as closely as possible, let the model run, and then test it by comparing the results to the historical climate record. But even with today's powerful supercomputers, that is a daunting challenge, says modeler Michael Schlesinger of the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign: "In the climate system, there are 14 orders of magnitude of scale, from the planetary scale--which is 40 million meters--down to the scale of one of the little aerosol particles on which wetter vapor can change phase to a liquid [cloud-particle]--which is a fraction of a millionths of a millimeter."
Of these 14 orders of magnitude, notes Schlesinger, researchers are able to include in their models only the two largest, the planetary scale and the scale of weather disturbances: .

. . .

"Climate modelers have been "cheating" for so long that it's almost become respectable. "
I don't have a link but if you have a proquest account, I can pm it to you.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by Luca » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:44 pm

kramer wrote: The way they do it is to run their climate models on known past climates and then see how well they predict what they know happened. I think this is a good way to check their models. .....
I don't have a link but if you have a proquest account, I can pm it to you.
Thanks for the offer, but my quest account is strictly an amateur. Plus I have no idea what a proquest account is.

More importantly, if you don't know everything that affects climate even now, you cannot measure the effects of those unknowns in the past, far less project their effect into the future.

Sometimes in science you have to be honest and simply say "I don't know." Luca

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by kramer » Fri Feb 25, 2011 6:16 pm

Luca wrote:Plus I have no idea what a proquest account is.
You can get one from a library that has this service. It's an online service that lets you search some old newspapers, magazines, medical journals, science journals, etc. for no charge.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

Heywould
Posts: 1443
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:20 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by Heywould » Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:11 pm

Luca wrote:
Thanks for the offer, but my quest account is strictly an amateur. Plus I have no idea what a proquest account is.

More importantly, if you don't know everything that affects climate even now, you cannot measure the effects of those unknowns in the past, far less project their effect into the future.

Sometimes in science you have to be honest and simply say "I don't know." Luca
Well you obviously have never had the pleasure of the "carbon cycle" story from Fordie. Oh by the way, he knows everything, just ask him.
If I Had a Dollar for Every Time Capitalism was Blamed for Problems Caused by Government I'd Be a Fat Filmmaker with a Baseball Cap

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18155
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by Fordama » Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:00 pm

Heywould wrote:
Well you obviously have never had the pleasure of the "carbon cycle" story from Fordie. Oh by the way, he knows everything, just ask him.
Oh yeah, the bit where kramer says "carbon is plant food, so it's impossible to have too much of it!" I wonder if he's ever looked up carbonic acid and what it does?

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: Hiding the Decline (by Climate Scientist Judith Curry)

Post by kramer » Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:04 am

Fordama wrote: Oh yeah, the bit where kramer says "carbon is plant food, so it's impossible to have too much of it!"
I don't recall ever saying "it's impossible to have too much of it!"

I think you just typed a bald-faced lie.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

Post Reply