Bombshell: Koch-Funded Study Finds ‘Global Warming Is Real’, ‘On The High End’ And ‘E

[flacaltenn]

Muller's a liar when he calls himself a skeptic. Everything he says can safely be dismissed.

Lot's of flap yap and nothing at all to back it up. You are firing blanks, Davey Boy.

Really?

In a 2004 Technology Review article,[9] Muller supported the findings of Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick in which they criticized the research, led by Michael E. Mann, which produced the so-called "hockey stick graph" of global temperatures over the past millennium, on the grounds that it did not do proper principal component analysis (PCA).[10] In the article, Richard Muller stated:

McIntyre and McKitrick obtained part of the program that Mann used, and they found serious problems. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken.

Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppress all data that do not. To demonstrate this effect, McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called "Monte Carlo" analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!

That discovery hit me like a bombshell, and I suspect it is having the same effect on many others. Suddenly the hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. How could it happen?[9]​

He went on to state "If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do), then you still should agree that we are much better off having broken the hockey stick. Misinformation can do real harm, because it distorts predictions." Muller's statements were widely quoted on skeptical blogs, and his status as a believer in global warming made his criticism of the "hockey stick" particularly damaging. In response, Mann criticized Muller on his blog RealClimate.[11] Marcel Crok, a reporter for the Dutch popular science magazine Natuurwetenschap & Techniek, later did a story on the incident.[12]​

Now tell us the AGW believer didn't say what he said.

Wow Dave -- That's really really sad news for Ole Roxy who's STILL to this day insisting that the Hockey Stick is absolutely correct..

 

[Old Rocks]

Really? Looks like Muller's BEST study confirmed the hockey stick.

As far as Muller stating that CO2 is a GHG, what else would a physicist state?

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[whitehall]

The post is based on somebody named Joe Romm that doesn't come up in a google search and is based on Romm's version of another op-ed. It's funny because there ain't a word of scientific evidence in the crap that the left likes to call a "bombshell".

 

[flacaltenn]

The post is based on somebody named Joe Romm that doesn't come up in a google search and is based on Romm's version of another op-ed. It's funny because there ain't a word of scientific evidence in the crap that the left likes to call a "bombshell".

Thanks for the trace.. Which made me aware of something else..

I SAW the "ThinkProgress" tag on the OP, and I'm sure many of the other knuckle dragging deniers saw it too.. But NOT ONE DENIER impeached the source..

I find that a refreshing change from the lefties all banning sources they don't like and refusing to debate because it's a "nutter" website.. Hope THEY (particularly ThunderBuns with his obnoxious post on this page -- and all the lefties that thanked him for that impeachment) notice the diff..

 

[RollingThunder]

The post is based on somebody named Joe Romm that doesn't come up in a google search and is based on Romm's version of another op-ed. It's funny because there ain't a word of scientific evidence in the crap that the left likes to call a "bombshell".

You must be an even bigger retard than the rest of the denier cult nutjobs, WhiteBread. And a liar too, or else almost criminally incompetent. A "google search" for 'Joe Romm' had his bio at the ThinkProgress website as the #1, very first result (out of 747,000), you flaming moron. The Wikipedia entry is #3.

Joe Romm is a Fellow at American Progress and is the editor of Climate Progress, which New York Times columnist Tom Friedman called "the indispensable blog" and Time magazine named one of the 25 "Best Blogs of 2010." In 2009, Rolling Stone put Romm #88 on its list of 100 "people who are reinventing America." Time named him a "Hero of the Environment″ and “The Web’s most influential climate-change blogger." Romm was acting assistant secretary of energy for energy efficiency and renewable energy in 1997, where he oversaw $1 billion in R&D, demonstration, and deployment of low-carbon technology. He is a Senior Fellow at American Progress and holds a Ph.D. in physics from MIT.


And then there is your braindead complaint that Dr. Romm's article was just his "version of another op-ed". LOLOLOLOL.....what a crazy kook you are....did you think no one would notice that Dr. Romm was reporting on an "op-ed" by Dr. Muller, BEST’s Founder and Scientific Director and the lead researcher on the recently released study in question. Which, BTW, is where the all of the scientific evidence is, retard. The op-ed is about Dr. Muller's conversion from an anthropogenic climate change skeptic into a solid proponent of the reality of AGW. The op-ed is titled “The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic” and, particularly since the BEST study was funded in part by the Koch brothers, this is a kind of bombshell for the denier cult dupes and stooges, although admittedly, most of you are too stupid to get it. Here's what Dr. Muller said in that New York Times op-ed, in case you've already forgotten.

The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic
The New York Times
By RICHARD A. MULLER
Published: July 28, 2012
(excerpts)

CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.

My total turnaround, in such a short time, is the result of careful and objective analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which I founded with my daughter Elizabeth. Our results show that the average temperature of the earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)

 

[IanC]

The post is based on somebody named Joe Romm that doesn't come up in a google search and is based on Romm's version of another op-ed. It's funny because there ain't a word of scientific evidence in the crap that the left likes to call a "bombshell".

Thanks for the trace.. Which made me aware of something else..

I SAW the "ThinkProgress" tag on the OP, and I'm sure many of the other knuckle dragging deniers saw it too.. But NOT ONE DENIER impeached the source..

I find that a refreshing change from the lefties all banning sources they don't like and refusing to debate because it's a "nutter" website.. Hope THEY (particularly ThunderBuns with his obnoxious post on this page -- and all the lefties that thanked him for that impeachment) notice the diff..

obviously there is a difference between the idea (science paper, op-ed, news item, etc) and the person discussing it. Joe Romm is an over-the-top catastrophist but that doesnt mean Muller's op-ed doesnt exist, just that Romm's conclusions about the op-ed should be looked at for distortions or discrepancies.

many of the warmists here seem to think that they can safely ignore anything discussed at WUWT or Climate Audit just because they dont like the bloggers (yes, Im talking about you Old Rocks, lol). but they miss out on being exposed to the ideas being presented unless one of 'their' sites also talks about it. actually, because the moderation is usually less on skeptical sites, you get a fuller picture on any story because so many sides are discussed in the comments.

that my opinion anyways

 

[Old Rocks]

Much prefer real science that you find here;

AGW Observer

 

[daveman]

Lot's of flap yap and nothing at all to back it up. You are firing blanks, Davey Boy.

Really?

In a 2004 Technology Review article,[9] Muller supported the findings of Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick in which they criticized the research, led by Michael E. Mann, which produced the so-called "hockey stick graph" of global temperatures over the past millennium, on the grounds that it did not do proper principal component analysis (PCA).[10] In the article, Richard Muller stated:

McIntyre and McKitrick obtained part of the program that Mann used, and they found serious problems. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken.

Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppress all data that do not. To demonstrate this effect, McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called "Monte Carlo" analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!

That discovery hit me like a bombshell, and I suspect it is having the same effect on many others. Suddenly the hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. How could it happen?[9]​

He went on to state "If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do), then you still should agree that we are much better off having broken the hockey stick. Misinformation can do real harm, because it distorts predictions." Muller's statements were widely quoted on skeptical blogs, and his status as a believer in global warming made his criticism of the "hockey stick" particularly damaging. In response, Mann criticized Muller on his blog RealClimate.[11] Marcel Crok, a reporter for the Dutch popular science magazine Natuurwetenschap & Techniek, later did a story on the incident.[12]​

Now tell us the AGW believer didn't say what he said.

Wow Dave -- That's really really sad news for Ole Roxy who's STILL to this day insisting that the Hockey Stick is absolutely correct..

And now he's saying Muller has always been a skeptic.

Of course, Roxy can make himself believe anything in service to his religion.

 

[daveman]

The post is based on somebody named Joe Romm that doesn't come up in a google search and is based on Romm's version of another op-ed. It's funny because there ain't a word of scientific evidence in the crap that the left likes to call a "bombshell".

Thanks for the trace.. Which made me aware of something else..

I SAW the "ThinkProgress" tag on the OP, and I'm sure many of the other knuckle dragging deniers saw it too.. But NOT ONE DENIER impeached the source..

I find that a refreshing change from the lefties all banning sources they don't like and refusing to debate because it's a "nutter" website.. Hope THEY (particularly ThunderBuns with his obnoxious post on this page -- and all the lefties that thanked him for that impeachment) notice the diff..

They didn't. Guaranteed.

 

[daveman]

Much prefer real science that you find here;

AGW Observer

Well, that's handy, isn't it? Calling only AWG-supporting science "real".

 

[daveman]

CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming.

I'll call him a liar. In 2004, he wrote: "If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do)..."

 

[CrusaderFrank]

AGW is EnviroMarxism, a total fraud directed at American productivity. I won't even call it fake science because it's no science at all.

 

[IanC]

Watts' new paper is up at WUWT

BEST paper on temps from 1750 is up at Curry's Climate Etc. include Curry distancing herself from CO2 attribution.

my favourite is McKitrick describing peer review of the still unaccepted BEST paper on UHI, via Bishop Hill. has anyone but me noticed that none of the four BEST papers from a year ago has made it through peer review yet?

 

[IanC]

CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming.

I'll call him a liar. In 2004, he wrote: "If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do)..."

he's not really a liar if he doesnt realize he is lying! lol. he is a senior physics lecturer at a major university and he is used to everybody hanging on to his every word, no matter if his story changes from group to group.

but he is no skeptic on CO2 or the IPCC as is clearly shown in his many youtube videos.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

AGW is the greatest fraud in human history.

No amount of facts, scientific research or even obvious widespread changes in climate patterns will ever convince you poor deluded and brainwashed denier cult retards.

BwahahahAHHAHAhahahahHAHHAHAHAhahahahahHAHHAhahahahHAhahahA!!!

Classic!

 

[daveman]

CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming.

I'll call him a liar. In 2004, he wrote: "If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do)..."

he's not really a liar if he doesnt realize he is lying! lol. he is a senior physics lecturer at a major university and he is used to everybody hanging on to his every word, no matter if his story changes from group to group.

but he is no skeptic on CO2 or the IPCC as is clearly shown in his many youtube videos.

Troo Beleevers like Roxy will forgive their high priests anything.

 

[Political Junky]

UC climate-change skeptic changes views - SFGate

The hot issue of global warming got hotter Monday when a UC Berkeley physicist, once a loud skeptic of human-caused climate change, agreed not only that the Earth is heating up, but also that people are the cause of it all.

Richard Muller converted only a year ago to the idea that the world has been warming for decades. Before then he had argued that global warming data - even figures compiled by U.N. experts - were badly flawed.

Now Muller is going further, blaming the warming almost entirely on human emission of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide - a conclusion that almost all climate scientists reached long ago.

Muller argued that the evidence from more than 36,000 temperature stations worldwide shows that the global thermometer has risen by 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years. The warm-up began with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, Muller said, and has accelerated in recent years.

 

[daveman]

UC climate-change skeptic changes views - SFGate

The hot issue of global warming got hotter Monday when a UC Berkeley physicist, once a loud skeptic of human-caused climate change, agreed not only that the Earth is heating up, but also that people are the cause of it all.

Richard Muller converted only a year ago to the idea that the world has been warming for decades. Before then he had argued that global warming data - even figures compiled by U.N. experts - were badly flawed.

Now Muller is going further, blaming the warming almost entirely on human emission of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide - a conclusion that almost all climate scientists reached long ago.

Muller argued that the evidence from more than 36,000 temperature stations worldwide shows that the global thermometer has risen by 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years. The warm-up began with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, Muller said, and has accelerated in recent years.

He was never a skeptic.

 

[IanC]

there is zero evidence that Muller was ever a climate skeptic. he was, and is today, a full supporter of the IPCC. his only 'skepticism' involved dissing Michael Mann and the Hockey Stick. I must admit that he fooled me when he promised a new, more complete, and better organized and adjusted Temperature Data Series. instead of cleaning up the data he just made it worse by using a kriging method that flags cooler readings more often than warmer readings.

again- it is interesting that none of the four BEST papers has been accepted for publication although they have been 'out' for a year.

 

[skookerasbil]

More k00k losing.......................


Coal's future is undimmed - latimes.com



They can roll out all the BS science crap for decades............no skin off my nose.