Is anthropogenic global warming real ?

About: The [New] Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study

source: multiple

___________________________________________________________

Richard Muller, Founder and Scientific Director: New Berkeley Earth analysis
New York Times: The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic Op-Ed By Richard A. Muller
Think Progress: Bombshell: Koch-funded study finds global warming is real, on the high end and essentially all due to carbon pollution

...

This item has been created to track the effect of Muller's study on the climate change debate. It is about that particular study and its effect ... not about climate change in general. Any comments that are not about this particular study or its effect will be summarily deleted ... that means that cartoons and even bloviations about Muller or his study are acceptable. Cartoons or bloviations about global warming in general are not. Please stay on topic here.

Here is the graph showing the close fit between the rise of CO2 and the increase in average temperature.

_________________________________________

source: Summary of the new study - description of graph above
The annual and decadal land surface temperature from the BerkeleyEarth average, compared to a linear combination of volcanic sulfate emissions and the natural logarithm of CO2. It is observed that the large negative excursions in the early temperature records are likely to be explained by exceptional volcanic activity at this time. Similarly, the upward trend is likely to be an indication of anthropogenic changes.

...

Comments

Seth says

Muller's method is also interesting ....

source: Richard Muller in NYT op-ed
"Moreover, our analysis does not depend on large, complex global climate models, the huge computer programs that are notorious for their hidden assumptions and adjustable parameters. Our result is based simply on the close agreement between the shape of the observed temperature rise and the known greenhouse gas increase."

...

Mark de LA says

Does he explain why the Ice Age ended without cars & factories?

Seth says

Today, the day the new study was released, the blogisphere's awareness of this looked like this ...

source: memorandum

Anthony Watts / Watts Up With That?:

New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial — PRESS RELEASE - U.S. Temperature trends show a spurious doubling due to NOAA station siting problems and post measurement adjustments. — Chico, CA July 29th, 2012 - 12 PM PDT - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Discussion:blogs.telegraph.co.uk, Guardian, Los Angeles Times, VICTORIA TAFT, Right Wing News, Climate Etc., The PJ Tatler, Power Line, Dot Earth, JustOneMinute and Instapundit

... I couldn't find any notice of this on drudge ... nor for that matter on realclimate.org.

Mark de LA says

I'll wait till Malloy (JunkScience.com) has a look at it. He has some stuff on Mueller.

Science isn't Headline News - Politics is!

Seth says

an interesting youtube of the data ... for your visulizations ...

Mark de LA says

Outside the fact that temperature data is being "massaged" & faulty data sensors are in place what kind of science do you think this is?

source: ... Muller’s book for future presidents also revealed his bias. the following is a copy of a review.
This is a useful book for people with very little scientific
knowledge. The author presents a bit of science, but little
enough that most of the intended audience will be able to
follow the argument. The science is not the problem in most
of the problem areas considered. Rather, it is economics,
specifically trade-offs, sometimes measured in dollars, but often
in lives lost due to one cause versus lives saved due to an
increased effort in another area, or habitat loss due to solar
power.

... read more at the link or ignore.

My take has long been the thought behind "Where do you put the thermometer in the Earth?". The Earth is not like the human body which when healthy is a near-constant 98.6 degree farhenheit. Get rid of the politics & you might get rid of some of the nonsense.

Seth says

Well just like Mark wanted to wait to bloviate to see what junkscience said about it ... me i want to wait to see what realclimate.org says about it. I've picked up from various comments that serious climate scientists will probably ignore Muller ... after all he has just now come around to saying what they have been saying all along.

What you believe, when you can't test it yourself, is shaped by who you trust.

Seth says

M 2012-07-31 11:23:58 16103

seth 2012-07-31 10:30:03 16103

& commone sense like ignoring the Sun & explaining why the Ice Age ended long ago before the industrial revolution .

The Muller study shows how sun variations are not even close to explaining what is happening. And yes, use your common sense ... why do you suppose that the human race can go on forever pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and not radically change things. Also if you watch the video you should get a feeling of why your question, "Where do you put the thermometer in the Earth?", just shows that you have no comprehension of the problem whatsoever.

Mark de LA says

Did I miss the part where someone explained how the Ice Age ended before the Industrial Revolution?

Mark de LA says

source: ...
stpaulchuck | August 2, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Reply so then, a “skeptic” who wasn’t really a skeptic basing his ‘conversion’ on badly molested data… I think I’ve seen this movie before.

...

A comment on http://junkscience.com/2012/08/02/rob-lyons-forgive-me-ipcc-for-i-have-sinned/

I'll put the full article link on 16107.

Seth says

M 2012-08-01 00:09:01 16103

Did I miss the part where someone explained how the Ice Age ended before the Industrial Revolution?

I've been intentionally ignoring that question because it seems to have an embedded assumption that is false on its face. The assumption being that "green house gasses should be able to explain all major climate changes" ... but there are obviously other very large and complex cycles going on. Perhaps if you would rephrase the question to be more pertinent i would be motivated to seek an answer to it in the Muller study.

Mark de LA says

seth 2012-08-02 11:22:07 16103

M 2012-08-01 00:09:01 16103

Did I miss the part where someone explained how the Ice Age ended before the Industrial Revolution?

NOPE! & NOPE! The assumption is that SOMETHING in Nature or Gaia or the Cosmos caused the ICE TO MELT - it was not human beings. What was it?

Seth says

Realclimate.org finally blogged about the Muller study. Read the entire post, not just my cut below, ... it is interesting and gives the view of a real scientist in the field's attitude.

source: by Gavin Schmidt, "Let the games begin!" published in realclimate.org

As most readers are probably aware, there was an op-ed in the Saturday New York Times from Richard Muller announcing the Berkeley Earth team’s latest results. It was odd enough that a scientific paper was announced via an op-ed, rather than a press release, odder still that the paper was only being submitted and had not actually been accepted, and most odd of all was the framing – a ‘converted skeptic’ being convinced by his studies that the planet has indeed warmed and that human activity is the cause – which as Mike and Ken Caldiera pointed out has been known for almost 2 decades.

Not wanting to be upstaged, plenty of ‘unconverted skeptics’ – including Anthony Watts and Ross McKitrick decided to stage dramatic press events and release barbs of their own. This was followed by a general piling on of commenters and bloggers trying to spin the events in their preferred direction combined with plenty of cluelessness in the general media about exactly who these people are (no-one special), what earth-shattering discovery had been made (none) and what it all means (not a lot).

... What is interesting to note is that they are more concerned with the Watts paper which Mark waved at above. Me, i'm more interested in the whole process of discovering a better truth of the matter.

Mark de LA says

Yep! Very little changed or will change! Those who want government money (TAX dollars) to do research will still want it. Those who want to control population behavior will still use whatever ruse they can to accomplish it. Those Chicken Little(s) who want to cry panic & Armageddon will still do so just to be right in case something big happens. Those who want to produce con games have a well established paradigm to play with & occasionally are successful - especially in Congress (think Solyndra & Harry Reid). & the beat goes on: (this one's much more fun) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umrp1tIBY8Q

Mark de LA says

It's all about the O & $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Source: ... The OIG report points to a host of lapses in the way OES/EGC has supervised climate change spending, based on what the OIG observed in a sampling of climate change projects between 2006 and 2010, when the overall spending tab amounted to some $214 million

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/15/exclusive-state-department-oversight-climate-change-spending-abroad-is-mess/#ixzz23dL6Zkid

Since then, however, the situation may have gotten worse.

For one thing, the Obama administration’s spending on international climate change projects accelerated between 2010, when the OIG report ended its scrutiny, and mid-2012, when the report appeared — and continues today.

That spending spree has been based on its commitments at a variety of United Nations-sponsored climate change meetings, including the failed Copenhagen climate change conference in December 2009, and subsequent sessions in Mexico, South Africa and, most recently, the Rio + 20 U.N. summit conference on “sustainable development” in Brazil.

... When you don't understand budgeting & ROI you go for politics & votes.

Is anthropogenic global warming real ?

About: The [New] Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Study

Tags

Comments

See Also