matthew- I find it interesting that when better technology comes on line it always seems to show less warming than is being claimed. if the ARGO buoys were reading warmer, would so much energy have been put into finding corrections for the data? same with satellites, every possible effort was put into finding ways to make the data come in line with what AGW needed. what about adjustments for UHI? the effect is obviously real but because the temps go up instead of down none of the agencies are particularly interested in fully compensating for it. Jones's 1990 paper said it was only 0.05C and they didnt even correct for it, they just added 0.05 to the error bars. do you think that is why there is such a large discrepancy between land or ocean temp trends?
the last hundred years has seen less than 1C increase. if you consider much of that was before 1950, and much of what remains seems to be directly attributable to 'adjustments', there is not much left for CO2 to account for. Natural variation, a roughly 1C rise for doubling CO2(quite easily less do to natural negative feedbacks) and there is nothing really pressing to freak out about. Arctic ice was low in the first part of last century but we didn't a daily death watch over it. Temperatures were easily as high or higher only 600 years ago. If the 'deniers' had access to research funding and media expression there would be a different meme and it would sound just as plausible, although it wouldn't be as exciting to blame every weather event on nature as it is for the AGW alarmists to blame man's sin of fossil fuel energy use for the imminent end of the world as we know it.
Spin is spin. If the climate scientist's were so capable why didnt they recognize the similar weather patterns that led to Europes deepfreeze and Australia's floods? Why didn't NASA tell the Aussies to lower that dam 'cause rain is on the way? Instead they were told the opposite. How do you think the Met Office fiasco will turn out? did they really predict a cold winter only to be rebuffed by govt wanting a warm forecast to be supportive of Cancun and the 'team'?
The longer I look into this whole mess the more it looks like a fuckup. I have been reading the Hockey Stick Illusion which lays out in gory detail the checkered history of Mann 98&99, the investigations, the OJ Simpson-like verdicts. Even to this month, the climate science bigwigs are still making misstatements and compounding it with coverup lies. Check out Trenberth's latest fiasco and then tell me if his integrity is something I or anyone else should aim for. Climate science has lost its way and the people running the show are willing to bend the facts into pretzels, stonewall when shown to be in the wrong, and let misconceptions run free even when they know them to be wrong. I especially hope that that sleazebag Mann gets outed as the disgraced evangelical that he is by having his emails prove that he lied all the way along.
