McIntyre
tlambert | August 12, 2007Because of the corrections to the GISS data 1998 and 1934 went from being in a virtual tie, to being in a virtual tie.. This, of course, has not stopped global warming denialists from endlessly hyping it as a big change.
For example, Glenn Reynolds:
Ace wonders why nobody's talking about the NASA climate data revision.
Because the change is trivial. Duh.
UPDATE: Well, here's a bit of notice.
The link goes to James Taranto, who gets his facts wrong, confusing the US temperature with the global temperature. Reynolds doesn't notice.
ANOTHER UPDATE: More here: "Will the mainstream media…
tlambert | August 10, 2007Steve McIntyre found an error in the GISS temperature data for the US. The GISTEMP page says:
USHCN station records up to 1999 were replaced by a version of USHCN data with further corrections after an adjustment computed by comparing the common 1990-1999 period of the two data sets. (We wish to thank Stephen McIntyre for bringing to our attention that such an adjustment is necessary to prevent creating an artificial jump in year 2000.)
How much difference did the adjustment make to the US temperature series? Well, it changed this:
to this:
Not much difference. The right hand end of the…
tlambert | May 18, 2007NASA's GISS has on-line graphing system that lets you see a graph of temperatures for a particular weather station (For example, here is Sydney airport).) Steve McIntyre decided to run a script that asked the GISS system to produce graphs of each and every station in the data set (thousands of weather stations). Since his script was requesting these as fast as it could, it made it difficult for anyone else to use the system, so the GISS webmaster blocked his access. When he asked why, the webmaster explained
Although you did not provide any further details about your problem, I will assume…
tlambert | May 8, 2007What did Steve McItyre when he discovered that his post claiming that Bob Ward's complaint was discredited was completely wrong? He originally wrote:
My main point here is that the RMS [actually by Bob Ward - TL] letter, publicly endorsed by the 37 profs, all supposedly experts in climate science, contains a statement about the course of sulphate emissions that is trivially seen to be inconsistent with the recently expressed IPCC AR4 view on the matter.
After I pointed out that it was trivially seen to agree with the IPCC AR4 view, McIntyre comes up with:
I had specifically referred to the…
tlambert | May 6, 2007Steve McIntyre attempts to defend Martin Durkin against Bob Ward's criticism:
In a legal complaint about inaccuracies in Swindle, one would expect meticulous accuracy, but once again in their statements about sulphates, RMS and the 37 profs [actually Bob Ward -TL] make claims in their complaint that are inaccurate according to the recent IPCC AR4. They say:
It has been well-established in the scientific literature that the period of cooling that was most evident over North America and Europe between about 1940 and 1976 was largely due to increased concentrations of aerosols (particularly…
tlambert | March 17, 2007Over at ClimateAudit Steve McIntyre complains that Al Gore loving Google has dropped ClimateAudit from their search results:
I've noted from time to time that climateaudit.org ranked extremely high on many google searches. One of the ways to find articles here has been to simply use google. I often do it. Today when I googled "climateaudit curry", I found no link to climateaudit.
In comments, John A blames Gavin Schmidt's orbital mind control lasers: *[Update: John A says he was referring to Google CEO Eric Schmidt. Which is still nuts.]
Time to write a nice letter to Mr Schmidt, methinks.…
tlambert | February 20, 2007Montreal's La Presse has published an article on the global warming skeptics' on-line war on science. (Google translation here.)
I get mentioned:
Certains vont jusqu'à accuser les éco-sceptiques d'utiliser de fausses identités dans les blogues afin de donner des voix multiples à leur opinion, en s'approuvant eux-mêmes.
Le blogueur australien Tim Lambert dit ainsi avoir découvert sur son site deux commentateurs qui n'étaient qu'une seule et même personne, le blogueur torontois Stephen McIntyre, cadre de l'industrie minière à la retraite. Les responsables du site environnementaliste…
tlambert | December 14, 2006Shorter Steve McIntyre: Al Gore is fat.
(Shorter concept invented by D squared, perfected by Busy, busy, busy.)
Update: McIntyre has edited his post. Here's what he originally wrote:
Gore has gotten a little stout over the years and a little jowly, as though he was subconsciously morphing into a shape more suitable to lead a penguin army.
tlambert | July 16, 2006Last year I banned per/David Bell from commenting for a few days after he abused another commenter. This prompted an attack on me from ClimateAudit where commenters wrote falsehoods like this:
Lambert knows his facts are weak, as such he does not allow others to comment upon them, otherwise the house of cards tumbles down.
Recently Lee and John Hunter were banned from commenting at ClimateAudit. The pretext was incivility. Here's what Lee wrote that got him banned:
JohnA, as always, you misstate my argument into something that is not what I actually said, and then argue based on what you…
tlambert | June 19, 2006Last year Steve McIntyre insinuated that Gavin Schmidt was dishonest after one of McIntyre's comments was held up in moderation: (link in quote is mine)
Posting at realclimate is a little thing. I was once involved in trying to detect a business fraud many years ago. A friend told me that to look for evidences of dishonesty in little things, as someone who is dishonest in big things will also be dishonest in little things. In passing, realclimate was able to locate and post URLs for versions of the VZ and Huybers Comments, but was seemingly unable to do so for our Replies.
So I ask the…
illconsidered | March 25, 2006This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
The Hockey Stick graph, the foundation of global warming theory, has been refuted and shown to be scientifically invalid, perhaps even a fraud.
Answer:
The first order of business here is to correct the mischaracterization of this single paleoclimate study as the "foundation" of Global Warming theory. It is anything but! What is going on today is unique and is understood by study of today's data and the best scientific theories the experts…
tlambert | February 27, 2006
I wrote earlier about McIntyre's attack on the NAS Panel on temperature reconstructions. McIntyre objected to two panelists because they were co-authors of co-authors of Mann, but not to the panelist who was a co-author of a co-author of McKitrick. In another post he also objects to another panelist, Kurt Cuffey, because Cuffey wrote:
Mounting evidence has forced an end to any serious scientific debate on whether humans are causing global warming. This is an event of historical significance, but one obscured from public view by the arcane technical literature and the noise generated by…
tlambert | February 16, 2006Hockey stick wars, the story so far: McIntyre and McKitrick (M&M) first claimed that the hockey stick graph was the product of "collation errors, unjustifiable truncations of extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, geographical location errors, incorrect calculations of principal components, and other quality control defects." Mann, Bradley and Hughes (MBH) published a correction to the supplementary information about their article, but which did not affect their results. Next, MM argued that the hockey stick was the result of incorrect normalization of the data. However, Hans van…
tlambert | November 18, 2005A couple of readers have gotten an error message like this when they try to access my blog:
Precondition Failed
We're sorry, but we could not fulfill your request for / on this server.
We have established rules for access to this server, and any person or robot that violates these rules will be unable to access this site.
And then it goes on to list some suggestions on how to fix things. You can blame spammers if you get this message because it comes from an anti-spam plugin Bad Behavior. Spambots usually don't follow the correct protocols when accessing a website, because it is less work…
tlambert | August 31, 2005The Wall Street Journal has a reputation for publishing excellent news pages and mendacious editorial pages. Now, an investigation by Environmental Science and Technology on an WSJ front page article on McIntyre and McKitrick makes you wonder if the editorial pages are influencing the news reporting. You should read the whole thing, but here are a few extracts:
But the harshest critic of the whole issue is former Wall Street Journal page-one editor, Frank Allen. He now directs the Institutes for Journalism & Natural Resources in Missoula, Mont. When asked to read the front-page article…
tlambert | August 26, 2005There have been a few people who have used
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_sock_puppet">sock
puppets on this blog. Note that a sock puppet differs from a
pseudonym in that sock puppets are used to deceitfully make it appear
that there is more support for you postion than there really is. Here
is a table to help you keep track of the socks that have been used here.
Real Name
Sock Puppets
John Lott
Mary Rosh, Washingtonian, Bob H, Tom H, Sam, Kevin H, Too bad Tim is not very accurate, Gregg
David Bell
Per, James Brown, M Mouse
Joe Cambria
Dave Curry, S Brid, Pessimist, Pat…
tlambert | August 21, 2005In the discussion onthis post, per posted an abusive comment, violating my comment policy.
I've had to ban him twice before (see here andhere), so I simply banned him again, deleting the offending comment and the few that he posted after that.
That should have been the end of it, but the folks at Climate Audit decided to branch out from their unending attempts to find fault with the hockey stick paper into an investigation of my comment policy: In this posting John A falsely claimed that I had deleted all of per's comments because I disagreed with them.
This prompted a flood of abusive…
tlambert | August 8, 2005In a comment to post on the Barton letters, Ed Snack claimed that
Michael Mann made an error in MBH98, he confused the square root of the cosine of the latitude with the cosine
Now if you look at MBH98, cosine latitude is only mentioned here:
Northern Hemisphere (NH) and global (GLB) mean temperature are estimated as areally-weighted (ie, cosine latitude) averages over the Northern hemisphere and global domains respectively
I did a bit of searching and found that Snack's source is this
statement in the supplementary material for von Storch at al's paper
"Reconstructing Past Climate from…
tlambert | June 29, 2005
HangLeft:
"it fits the pattern we've come to know and expect from the Republicans: when facts get in the way of their bankrupt ideology, they cover up those facts and intimidate the messenger."
Coturnix: "With all the misuse of science by the current Administration I still never expected the Lysenko-style persecution of scientists whose data do not support the party line. Yet, this day has come. The USA has its Lysenko, and his name is Joe Barton."
Will: "Barton is known for being a staunch opponent of the Kyoto Protocol and referring to climate change provisions as "odorous" measures…
tlambert | June 27, 2005Chris Mooney reports on the latest attack on the hockey stick. Joe Barton, chair of the Committee on Energy and Commerce has sent out a set of letters, supposedly "requesting information regarding global warming studies". However, if you look at the letters, you will find that the only study he is interested is Mann, Bradley and Hughes from way back in 1998 (the "hockey stick" study); and the questions are loaded ones of the form: "Can you explain why you made all the errors detailed in Mcintyre and McKitrick's Energy and Environment paper?"
It is probably just a coincidence that Joe Barton…