Einn höfunda BEST skýrsunnar í loftslagsmálum ásakar aðalhöfundinn um að villa um fyrir fólki...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ja hérna hér... Sá fáheyrði atburður hefur gerst að einn höfunda svokallaðrar BEST greinar sem kennd er við Berkley háskóla hefur ásakað aðalhöfundinn um að hafa vísvitandi beitt blekkingum þegar skýrslan var kynnt. (BEST = Berkley Earth Surface Temperature).

Um þessa greinar hefur verið fjallað  hér á bloggsíðu Einars Sveinbjörnssonar og hér á bloggsíðu Loftslag.is.  Sjálfur fjallaði ég aðeins um málið í athugasemdum #6, #12, #13 og #18 í bloggpistli Einars hér.

Aðalhöfundur skýrslunnar er prófessor Richard Muller sem er eðlisfræðingur mað áhuga á stjarnelisfræði og starfar sem prófessor hjá Berkeley háskóla.  Einn höfunda er prófessor Judith Curry sem er loftslagsfræðingur og veitir forstöðu Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences hjá Georgia Institute of Technology.  Vefsíða Dr. Curry, Climate Etc.

 

Sjá grein sem var að birtast á vefsíðu Daily Mail, Mail Online:

 

Örstuttur úrdráttur úr greininni sam nauðsynlegt er að lesa í heild sinni með því að smella á fyrirsögnina:

Scientist who said climate change sceptics had been proved wrong accused of hiding truth by colleague

By David Rose

Last updated at 5:41 AM on 30th October 2011

It was hailed as the scientific study that ended the global warming debate once and for all – the research that, in the words of its director, ‘proved you should not be a sceptic, at least not any longer’.

Professor Richard Muller, of Berkeley University in California, and his colleagues from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures project team (BEST) claimed to have shown that the planet has warmed by almost a degree  centigrade since 1950 and is warming continually....

...

But today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that a leading member of Prof Muller’s team has accused him of  trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped.

Prof Judith Curry, who chairs the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at America’s prestigious Georgia Institute of Technology, said that Prof Muller’s claim that he has proven global warming sceptics wrong was also a ‘huge mistake’, with no  scientific basis.

Prof Curry is a distinguished climate researcher with more than 30 years experience and the second named co-author of the BEST project’s four research papers....

...

Prof Muller also wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal. It was here, under the headline ‘The case against global warming scepticism’, that he proclaimed ‘there were good reasons for doubt until now’.

Media storm: Prof Muller's claims received uncritical coverage in the media this week:

This, too, went around the world, with The Economist, among many others, stating there was now ‘little room for doubt’.

Such claims left Prof Curry horrified.

‘Of course this isn’t the end of scepticism,’ she said. ‘To say that is the biggest mistake he [Prof Muller] has made. When I saw he was saying that I just thought, “Oh my God”.’

In fact, she added, in the wake of the unexpected global warming standstill, many climate scientists who had previously rejected sceptics’ arguments were now taking them much more seriously.

...

 

 

 

 

Lesið meira: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2055191/Scientists-said-climate-change-sceptics-proved-wrong-accused-hiding-truth-colleague.html#ixzz1cGL0kScp

 

 

 

 

 

Sjá einnig grein um málið eftir Dr. David Whitehouse:
Best Confirms Global Temperature Standstill

 

Það er rétt að árétta að þetta mál fjallar um þá aðferð sem notuð var til að kynna niðurstöður BEST og endurspeglast m.a. í fyrirsögnunum sem myndin er af hér fyrir ofan, en málið fjallar ekki um þau gögn sem notuð voru. Þau eru aðgengileg á netinu hverjum þeim sem vill nota þau til að skoða raunverulegar niðurstöður.    Dr. Curry er sem sagt að gagnrýna kynninguna, sem hún telur hafa gefið ranga mynd, sérstaklega þar sem gefið er til kynna " “end of skepticism” og “We see no evidence of global warming slowing down.”  Það er ekki verið að gagnrýna aðferðafræðina sem vissulega er áhugaverð.

Bloggsíða Dr. Judith Curry Climate Etc.

 ---

 

Mynd úr greininni í Mail Online í gær:

 

 

 

                 (Takið eftir að efri ferillinn nær yfir 100 ára tímabil, en sá neðri 10 ára tímabil)

 

 

Þessi mynd fylgdi BEST kynningunni um daginn:

 Etv. mætti kalla svona mynd BEST Propaganda

 

 

 

 Greinarnar umræddu eru hér:

• Decadal variations in the global atmospheric land temperatures
• Influence of urban heating on the global temperature land average using rural sites identified from MODIS classifications
• Berkeley Earth temperature averaging process
• Earth atmospheric land surface temperature and station quality

 Um BEST á Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Earth_Surface_Temperature

 

---

 

Uppfært klukkan 13:00,  30. október.

Dr. Judith Curry fjallar um greinina í Mail Online hér. Hún skrifar:

Last week I spoke with David Rose of the Mail about the BEST publicity and PR, and Richard Muller’s public statements.  The resulting article is [here].

I discussed some concerns I had about the BEST PR on this previous thread.

In David Rose’s article, the direct quotes attributed to me are correct.

To set the record straight, some of the other sentiments attributed to me are not quite right, I will discuss these here.

“Hiding the truth” in the title is definitely misleading, I made it pretty clear that there was uncertainty in the data itself, but the bigger issues are to analyze the data and interpret it.  I made it clear that this was not a straightforward and simple thing to do.

I told Rose that I was puzzled my Muller’s statements, particularly about “end of skepticism” and also “We see no evidence of global warming slowing down.”

I did not say that “the affair had to be compared to the notorious Climategate scandal two years ago,” this is indirectly attributed to me.  When asked specifically about the graph that apparently uses a 10 year running mean and ends in 2006,  we discussed “hide the decline,” but I honestly can’t recall if Rose or I said it first.  I agree that the way the data is presented in the graph “hides the decline.”  There is NO comparison of this situation to Climategate.  Muller et al. have been very transparent in their methods and in making their data publicly available, which is highly commendable.

My most important statement IMO is this: ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’  My main point was that this is a very good data set, the best we currently have available for land surface temperatures.  To me, this should have been the big story:  a new comprehensive data set, put together by a team of physicists and statisticians with private funds.  Showing preliminary results is of course fine, but overselling them at this point was a mistake IMO.

I arrived in Santa Fe yesterday.  More on the Conference in a forthcoming post.  Muller and Rohde will be at the conference, I will be meeting them for the first time and I will try to understand what is going on here.

And finally, this is NOT a new scandal.  An important new data set has been released.  Some new papers have been posted for comments, which are not surprisingly drawing criticism and controversy.   The main issue seems to be Richard Muller’s public statements.   All this does not constitute a new scientific scandal in any way.

My continued collaboration on this project will be discussed this week with Muller and Rohde.  My joining this group was somewhat unusual, in that I did not know any of these people prior to being invited to join their team (although I very quickly figured out that they were highly reputable scientists).  I thought the project was a great idea, and I still do, but it currently has a tarnish on it.  Lets see what we can do about this.

Nánar  hér

 

 

 

 

Ja hérna hér, er eitthvað mikið deilumál í uppsiglingu?...