Global climate whatever
For the past two years, the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature team at University of California, Berkley has been sorting through two centuries of temperature readings, over 1.6 billion in all.
That information is all now in a database that, among other things, resulted from,
removing duplicate numbers, tossing out clearly erroneous records—such as temperatures above 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit—and fixing Celsius readings mislabeled as Fahrenheit.
What is interesting here is that the Berkeley team released all of their results to the public before a peer review, and, since the release, as a result of input from other scientists, certain information has been updated and corrected in the open.
So, what do we know now? Unambiguously, she says, that depends.
…Berkeley Earth’s trend graphs, which reflect some modeling, show temperatures continuing to rise since the late 1990s. But the raw numbers show no definitive evidence of an increase in that time.
And,
… fluctuations in the land temperature for the past 13 years make it extremely difficult to say whether the Earth has been continuing to warm during that time.
Continuing on,
[m]uch of the U.S. and Northern Europe has cooled in the last 70 years, Berkeley Earth found. So did one-third of all weather stations world-wide, while two-thirds warmed.
Using that information, Berkley concludes that we are indeed warming, but, maybe not.
[S]keptics aren’t convinced because it depends how concentrated those warming sites are. If they happen to be bunched up while the cooling sites are in sparsely measured areas, then more places could be cooling.
Then again, a weather station that was in an undeveloped area 70 years ago, but which is now surrounded by a concrete city, would clearly provide a higher reading today than 70 years ago. But that may only prove that concrete structures now surrounding the station absorb heat, or, it could prove that the earth is warming.
So, based upon this conclusive data, I think it only reasonable to believe that the earth’s climate may or may not be warming or cooling or changing.
Kudos, however to Berkeley for assembling this data, fixing obvious errors, and generally, letting scientists not only comment, but changing their research findings due to those comments.
Let the discussion begin.
14 Comments
The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.
You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.
The site is not broken.
Wow SOS. Thanks so much for finding this.? Just seems to me we here on earth can do little when compared to our sun. Should we blow up that evil sun? I think not.
I’ve got news for all the boneheads and their climate change.. I can guarantee it will change! It always has and it always will. Don’t they remember the Ice Age, Dinosaurs roaming the steamy earth etc.?Do they really think that just because Humans inhabit the world it’s?going to stay?the way we like it forever. Only an self involved idiot?believes that.
?
?I remember when the? first jets were going to destroy the ozone &? we’d all freeze to death. I’m like,FOR,Global Warming. This will lessen the amount of fuel we’ll need to keep warm,increase the food supply & give me a few extra days at the beach.
And maybe, just maybe, one less October snowstorm!
Keep in mind, if there’s money to be made out there …this “product” served as Global Warming will be on the government plate.? It’s a great way to raise taxes and control industry under a humanitarian guilt.? Everything is a “foot print” on our society, even the phrase “modern day” means pollution.? Our poor planet.? What …have …we …done …to …it.
?
There will come a day when we’ll be completely green.? We won’t speak out loud due to noise pollution.? Man will wear no clothes due to the naturalist preservationist perspective.? We’ll migrate and roam and forge and have no need for shelter.? Trees and animals will flourish.? Humans will be one with nature again.? All that …and …then the asteroid drops out from space traveling 400 million miles per hour, 80 miles wide, glowing red through the atmosphere and hits the earth with such force
?
You get the picture?? We start all over again?? That’s nature.
I have read the BEST report by physicist Richard Muller and associated comments by others that have appeared in various sources.? The only salient point addressed in those rambling pieces is that global warming is occurring.? Armed with those data, other writers excoriate those who alarmists love to call deniers with what they allege to be damning evidence.
However climate optimists, rather than denying, are well aware and agree that warming has been leisurely and linearly occurring since about 1650.? But Muller?s report is not even about the actual issue which, in case there is should be a spark of interest, is whether or not any significant amount of the warming that has been occurring is human-caused. ?
And Muller is careful to point out that his report does not comment on that question.?
<p class="MsoNormal"…
– but Muller is somewhat confused about that issue. ?This from Friends of Science:
Professor Richard Muller, of Berkeley University in California, and his colleagues from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures project team (BEST) claim to have shown that the planet has warmed by almost a degree? Celsius since 1950 and is warming continually. Their work was published last month, just ahead of the Durban climate summit, and was cited uncritically around the world as irrefutable evidence that only the most stringent measures to reduce CO2?emissions can save civilization as we know it. However, Judith Curry points out that Prof. Muller?s own data refutes his claim that global warming has not leveled off since the end of the 1990s. Faced with this criticism, Prof. Muller insisted that neither his claims that there has not been a standstill in global warming, nor his temperature graph, were misleading because the BEST project had made its raw data available on its website. ?But he admitted that the data suggested that world temperatures have not risen in 13 years, which might or might…
…?not be statistically significant.”
Might one think that Muller is doing a little “fudging” of data himself?
Here are Curry’s thoughts:
<http://judithcurry.com/2011/10/25/best-of-the-best-critiques/#more-5460>
<http://judithcurry.com/2011/10/30/mail-on-best/>
Kanestian
Confusing!
It’s twenty-one degrees Fahrenheit this morning. I could use a little “global warming”.
Egads! Enough already. Scientists should be held to an accountable standard of answering straight-forward questions when they present “data”.? Such questions could be: What does your research prove? What is your bias? Who funded your scholarly pursuit? Are you a liberal or a conservative? Why are you presenting this data? Etc.
Of course, the answers to these questions could be inferred from the subject matter and context. That a scientist is “pure” is humorous; that scientific inquiry is without motive is hilarious! They all are beholding to someone or some group. Follow the money.
Another ambiguous presentation data, and yet another blatant abuse of investigative results by individuals and groups massaging the data to fit their agendas.
Gee whiz, the earth is slowing down ever so slightly and is thus getting closer to the sun . . .
?
don’t worry if this crisis doesn’t pan out..libs will come up with the next “crisis” we need to fix right now//no time for debate????
But Al Gore, the patron saint of all things green and hypocritical, told us Anthropogenic Global Warming is ‘settled science’.? This is unsettling.
What Gore knows about science can be summed up in the? “C-” and “D” grades he earned in the only two science courses he took in college.
Wow, he actually took science courses.? Who would have guessed?
No one that actually listens to what he says!? 😉