The Roanoke Slant

-
Prof. Richard Mueller a professor at UC Berkeley (the west coast epicenter of fair and balanced views) wrote an op-ed for the New York Times (the east coast epicenter of fair and balanced views) saying he was once a global warming skeptic but now he’s completely convinced there’s been a 2-½ degree increase in the earth’s temperature and it’s all your fault! Not since the alchemists turned lead into gold has a distinguished scientist gone through such a transformation.
Climate change skeptic is now believer
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?pagewanted=all
-
The alleged 2-½ degree change in earth’s temperature is clearly multiple times larger than the NASA data published by the premier alarmist Jim Hansen that clearly shows less than one degree warming since 1880.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif
-
And the global surface data shows no significant change since 1998.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.C.gif
-
But these conflicts with the facts pale in comparison to Prof.  personalized “scientific process” that brought him to his “consensus” conclusions.
-
“We tried fitting the shape to simple math functions (exponentials, polynomials), to solar activity and even to rising functions like world population. By far the best match was to the record of atmospheric carbon dioxide, measured from atmospheric samples and air trapped in polar ice.”
“How definite is the attribution to humans? The carbon dioxide curve gives a better match than anything else we’ve tried. Its magnitude is consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect — extra warming from trapped heat radiation. These facts don’t prove causality and they shouldn’t end skepticism, but they raise the bar:”
-
-
What an amazing nonscientific op-ed that the author finally concludes “shouldn’t end skepticism”!
-
Every freshman in any scientific program knows that “curve fitting” is not causal analysis and cannot be used to draw any valid cause-effect conclusions!
Every freshman also knows that “finding a curve that gives a better match than anything else we’ve tried” will result in a failing grade in any science or math class in any course in any college in the world. This isn’t science! This isn’t math! This isn’t worthy of publication even as a political op-ed in the NYT (or the Roanoke Times).
-
How can the media cut down perfectly good trees that are helping to convert CO2 to O2 to publish this “junk science” that is nothing more than political hyperbole?
-
This is yet another example of the liberal media hyping the Gorite cool-aide hoping that no one who was awake during the 7th grade earth science class will object to those who apparently refuse to acknowledge that there is a “scientific method” and this isn’t it!
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2012/06/global-warming-deja-vu.html
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2012/07/its-hot-again-back-to-30s.html
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2012/07/drought-heat-and-obama-perfect-storm.html
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2011/12/arctic-ice-melting-yet-again.html
-
How I became a Skeptic, and why I still am:
http://www.roanokeslant.org/AGW-Skeptic/
-