HAHAHa, the Sh*t has hit the fan

[IanC]

Judith Curry, second author on the BEST papers has thrown Muller under the bus.

Uh oh: It was the BEST of times, it was the worst of times | Watts Up With That?

 

[Old Rocks]

Really Ian? So what does Judith Curry herself have to say.

Mail on BEST | Climate Etc.

Now that reads a bit differant than the drivel that Watts spouts.

 

[Old Rocks]

Very interesting, wonder where Watts gets his shit.

Discussion with Rich Muller | Climate Etc.

Discussion with Rich Muller
Posted on October 30, 2011 by curryja| 98 Comments
by Judith Curry

I had a 90 minute meeting with Richard Muller this evening.


I have to say that there isn’t much that we disagree on.

He was very excited to show me his latest analyses. He is clearly driven by the science and is very sincere about wanting to make progress on understanding the global temperature record.

The discussion clarified several things for me.

First, Muller’s title for the WSJ op-ed was “Cooling the Warming Debate,” he intended it to be a conciliatory article regarding how this data set could be used to settle some of the debates surrounding the land temperature record. The “End of Skepticism” title was provided by the WSJ editors. Muller was not happy about this change of title.

 

[IanC]

yes. after a long meeting Curry was more concilliatory than before. perhaps Muller should have had the meeting before he pulled in the press. as usual there is a stink of IPCC shenanigans in the background.

we shall see. Muller acknowledges privately that temps have flattened but publically states they are still going up. I think he is a pompous professor who is used to saying anything off the top of his head and not being held accountable for it.

we shall see. this is just the beginning. peer review is up next and I feel for the reviewers who will be scrutinized as closely as the papers.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Ian, you were trumpeting Dr. Muller's work when he announced that he was going to do an extensive statistical investigation using all the data gathered from weather stations all over the world. So, he ran the data, and, amazingly, came out with the same results as the scientists that had already done the studies.

You and the other 'skeptics' lost on this one big time. And Dr. Curray didn't make the statements attributed to her by that article. Once again, words put into her mouth by a 'skeptic', is just an underhanded form of lying. Something which the 'skeptics' excel at.

 

[Old Rocks]

BEST Climate Science Study (The Video) | Planetsave

Just for you, Ian.

 

[IanC]

discussions of BEST's scalpel method finally resolved my curiosity of why the GISS went up so much after 2007. Menne's method of recognizing discontinuous jumps in data (site movement, etc) is heavily biased by the general warming trend. Muller's scalpel makes even more cuts, which is why BEST has the highest readings of all the groups.

fortunately BEST methods have to go through peer review where this problem will have to be addressed. unlike the Menne method which was arbitrarily put into place with no accounting.