Comments on: More proof global temps lag SOI

By: McLean’s folly and the climate clueless

McLean’s folly and the climate clueless — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:05:49 +0000

[...] member Bryan Leyland used this to “predict” a coming cooling, which was lapped up by the usual suspects. In January this year, Leyland predicted cooling would continue until at least June. Now McLean has [...]

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:19:27 +0000

Joe Bastardi is on a similar theme here: (video)

http://www.accuweather.com/video.asp?channel=vblog_bastardi

By: val majkus

val majkus — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:25:30 +0000

There’s a link in a comment to the above article by Geoff Sherrington
to http://www.geoffstuff.com/Jane%20Warne%20thermometry%20Broadmeadows.pdf
A Preliminary Investigation of Temperature Screen Design and Their
Impacts on Temperature Measurements

By: val majkus

val majkus — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:19:44 +0000

Warwick Hughes http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=780#more-780 has a Guest article by Pat Frank
Dr Frank says
We’ve all read the diagnosis, for example here, that the global climate has suffered “unprecedented warming,” since about 1900. The accepted increase across the 20th century is 0.7 (+/-)0.2 C. As an experimental chemist, I always wondered at that “(+/-)0.2 C.” In my experience, it seemed an awfully narrow uncertainty, given the exigencies of instruments and outdoor measurements. I did a study which led to the paper that is just out in Energy and Environment [5]. Here’s the title and the abstract:

Title: “Uncertainty in the Global Average Surface Air Temperature Index: A Representative Lower Limit”
(abstract follows and conclusion)
This lower limit of instrumental uncertainty implies that Earth’s fever is indistinguishable from zero Celsius, at the 1σ level, across the entire 20th century.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 09:26:41 +0000

Goodness, Clarence, are you suggesting that some scientists might disregard this negation of the dangerous anthropogenic global warming theory?

Now, just what the gosh-darn was that theory, anyways?

By: Clarence

Clarence — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 09:16:31 +0000

In climate science, it is unknown to predict an outcome of a particular hypothesis and accept that its truth will stand or fall on whether the prediction turns out to be correct.

Instead, climate scientists “project” future outcomes based on storylines which are improbable but which can’t be disproved by results until all contemporaries are dead.

By: Richard C (NZ)

Richard C (NZ) — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 04:05:34 +0000

But I thought (as Doug Mackie puts it at HT)-

But as an example of successful whacking I would like to cite the case of the McLean, de Freitas and Carter paper. It was shot down mercilessly. Now I’m not great frequenter of the denialosphere but I have formed the impression that this work is not often cited now that anyone can easily post links to solid refudiations.

Note the Sarah Palin vernacular.

By: Bob D

Bob D — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 02:21:57 +0000

The current La Nina is predicted (by NOAA) to last through the SH winter. This means we can probably expect globally cooler conditions for almost a year, because of the lag.