APS, ACS & AGU
McLean, de Freitas and Carter
It’s all just the sun cosmic rays orbit
A new paper in Science, Evidence for Obliquity Forcing of Glacial Termination II has already become “Wobbling Earth Triggers Climate Change“. No doubt it is an interesting contribution to our understanding of Milankovitch cycles, assuming it holds up to scrutiny.
Needless to say this is meat for the climate change Denier ‘New Study disproves/overturns/undermines global warming/climate change science/models/theory!“ canard, and equally obvious is the fact that it does no such thing. Expect this one to be turning up in our comments sections, and on forums and news sharing sites for the next little while. If anyone puts together a quick rebuttal it would be appreciated.
Well, it has been three weeks since McLean, de Frietas and Carter, so we were due for a new one. Anyone want to whip up a quick model predicting the longevity of memes in the Denialosphere?
Orbit Recycled Methane
And of course “MIT Team Says “Global Warming Part of Earth’s Natural Cycle” -A Galaxy Poll” which was posted today is just an attempt to resurrect the “Comfortably Dumb: The TGDaily MIT/Methane Fraud” from last fall. Look for it on a wingnut blog near you!
It’s just weather
I always like to have a couple of current links to slap on to the standard “my fridge was cold this morning so climate change is a hoax” comments and stories, so here’s this months:
NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) has determined that July of 2009 was the second warmest July globally, since records were kept going back well over a hundred years. Second Warmest July on Record Globally
The record heat of Summer 2009 continues to break records in Texas, especially for longevity in the southern part of the state. Texas Heat Records Continue Falling
Why am I not surprised?
I assume everyone has heard of “The Family”? the Christian “C Street House” group that is the subject of The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power*. It is a group that literally believes in divine right to rule; ie God chooses the males who should lead the rest of us lumpenproleteriat, and things like democracy etc are just silly.
I guess that would explain the fascination with the “Medieval Warm Period”;
it’s not the medieval climate that they want, it’s the political system.
Enemy at the gates
I recently did a couple of posts about the assault on academic societies to try get them to ‘review’ their official stances on climate change. There have been a few developments:
Probably the best way to be well informed about what is going on with the American Physical Society is to somehow track John Mashey through the web and read his comments as you find them; best, but not necessarily the easiest. He promises to post as soon as he finishes his analysis, which should be quite interesting as he is analysing the signatories on the letter.
Who are they is an interesting question. Apparently there are now 80 ” prominent scientists, researchers and environmental business leaders.” Have you noticed how they are always “prominent” when they sign a Denier document?
What exactly is an “environmental business leader” by the way? and why a little further in the article have they become “scientists and academic leaders“? Where did the environmental business leaders go? Note that this copy of the Open Letter is hosted by the “Conservative Business Network.” Who knew they took such an interest in physics? I guess it’s the influence of those disappearing environmental business leaders.
One name on the letter is particularly interesting; Chris Colose has noticed that the dead Victorian era Paleontologist Hugh Falconer is a signatory. Hard to believe that they would deliberately try such an appalling fraud on such a public document, but a google search turns up no ‘Hughen Falconer’ anywhere, and there is certainly no Hughen or Hugh Falconer on faculty at The University of Aberdeen.
The closest I can find associated with Aberdeen are:
- Falconer, D. F., Research Student, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Division of Applied Health Sciences;
- Falconer, M. R., Human Resources Adviser, Human Resources, Human Resources Services;
- Ranald H Falconer who was awarded an Honours degree in Sports and Exercise Science;
all of whom I thought unlikely to be a current or former APS member. Unless it’s Ranald H., could he be the prominent scientist with his recent honours degree? So is it an error of some sort? or are they that crazy?
ACS and AGU
In the American Chemical Society debacle Michael Tobis notes that the number of members letters received by the ACS that actually dispute current climate science is actually only 19 out of a membership of 160,000.
Eli has some updates on the ACS and AGU. He also has a call for letters of support for the Chemical & Engineering News editor Rudy Baum with reference to the American Chemical Society debacle in particular. This definitely worth doing if you are anyone the ACS is likely to consider credible.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Memes
Now that we have all had a chance to catch our breath Realclimate has done thoughtful overview on the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum story of a month ago. See PETM Weirdness and the comments for what it all may mean, and just how much it did not ‘disprove/overturn/undermine global warming/climate change science/models/theory’, despite the Denier claims to the contrary.
Larry, Moe, and Curly Joe
For the more technically inclined Grumbine has also had a go at the McLean, de Freitas and Carter paper, but from a different angle. As the title “How not to analyze climate data” suggests, while he discusses McLean et al in particular the lessons are much broader. For eg he offers
So, some ‘weeding sources’, or ‘scientific specificity’ signs:
* When a paper makes a conclusion about the correlation between A and B, verify that it is A and B that they are correlating.
* If a filter is applied, look for the authors to discuss a) why a filter is being applied at all, and b) why the particular filter they chose was used.
Meanwhile, in case anyone hasn’t heard that the Big guns brought to bear:
The 9 (!) rebuttal authors span the globe from Japan to the UK to New Zealand to Colorado and New York, reading like a who’s who of global climate science: G. Foster, J. D. Annan, P. D. Jones, M. E. Mann, B. Mullan, J. Renwick, J. Salinger, G. A. Schmidt, and K. E. Trenberth.
and most curious is this comment at Open Mind
A message on behalf of the editors of JGR Atmospheres: as editors, we do not discuss the details of the peer review process and we will also not do that in this case. We will say that despite all the hard efforts made by reviewers and editors, the peer review process is not perfect. Occasionally, papers that contain errors or controversial statements without adequate discussion do get accepted for publication. In these cases, JGR Atmospheres encourages the scientific community to submit comments and discuss these papers in the peer-reviewed literature.
As James Annan notes “Not that the contents of the comment are particularly interesting, but the fact that they felt that they needed to say it at all…”
“Extreme” rainfall events now more frequent and even more extreme than they were in the 1950s. In the Great Plains, for example, the amount of rain that falls during the heaviest one percent of rainy days has grown by 15 percent over the last 50 years.. Earth Gauge
We give our consent every moment that we do not resist.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 290 … still no evidence.
Comments that are not relevant to the post that they appear under or the evolving discussion will simply be deleted, as will links to Denier spam known to be scientific gibberish
- The “Mostly” Open Thread is for general climate discussion that is not relevant to a particular post. Spam and abuse rules still apply;
- The “Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread is for comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change.