BTW, Demonstrable AGW = 0. Again.

[TDPerk]

AGW proven again to be an invention from whole cloth.

From WUWT.

When will those who wanted for the "best" of reasons to kill billions by deliberate impoversihment be made to pay?

[randomencounter]

They're just making noise because the Koch report says otherwise.

[TDPerk]

The report funded to a small degree by the Koch's makes use of the BEST data set, which Watts and company have just shown is worthless--it at least doubles the warming seen.

An artifact of bad sensor citing leading to local forcing which is biased towards higher temps.

[randomencounter]

The most that can be said about the new data analysis is it shows that US air temperatures aren't changing as fast as the Berkeley analysis says they are, and with a methodology that is still open to debate.

It still shows a clear warming trend, and doesn't give any actual feedback on anthropic influence. It's also limited to the Continental US, not even including data from Canada and Mexico (apparently the USA is "the globe" now).

So this somehow makes AGW a myth, even though the only clear disagreement is the rate of warming over a limited area?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

[hanelyp]

The claim being made by AGW proponents is that they can prove AGW to a level of confidence warranting intrusive government action. A proper review of the evidence shows the data to be within the error margin of a null hypothesis of now significant climate change. In part because the error margins are larger than the AGW proponents will admit. In part because the data presented has substantial quality problems.

[randomencounter]

So if I accept the science that says that the world is warming and that human action is responsible for at least a portion of it, I also have to accept that government intervention is the right thing to do about it and that the necessary intervention will make everyone poorer?

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

I accept the science.

I believe that the best thing for the government to do is sponsor research into technologies that will replace tech that contributes to global warming (like fusion power and advanced wind, solar, and fission power).

Since such tech should be able to compete more than adequately with the cost (and unpredictable fuel costs) of of fossil fuel power I expect the free market to be able to take the ball from there and run with it, with great profits to be made by many.

[Diogenes]

The most that can be said about the new data analysis is it shows that US air temperatures aren't changing as fast as the Berkeley analysis says they are, and with a methodology that is still open to debate.

It still shows a clear warming trend, and doesn't give any actual feedback on anthropic influence. It's also limited to the Continental US, not even including data from Canada and Mexico (apparently the USA is "the globe" now).

So this somehow makes AGW a myth, even though the only clear disagreement is the rate of warming over a limited area?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

My first clue that Man made global warming was utter Bullsh*t was the fact that it was being pushed by Liberals. I had to ask myself how a group of people who have never been right about anything, could possibly be right about this, but for awhile I was willing to concede the possibility that even a blind squirrel might find an acorn once in a while.

Then I saw the spectra-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and I realized, "Yup. Liberals are idiots. They are wrong about this too."

Look up the Spectral-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and tell me why we aren't an 800 degree inferno, like Venus.

Looking at anything beyond water vapor is a waste of time.

[seedload]

The most that can be said about the new data analysis is it shows that US air temperatures aren't changing as fast as the Berkeley analysis says they are, and with a methodology that is still open to debate.

It still shows a clear warming trend, and doesn't give any actual feedback on anthropic influence. It's also limited to the Continental US, not even including data from Canada and Mexico (apparently the USA is "the globe" now).

So this somehow makes AGW a myth, even though the only clear disagreement is the rate of warming over a limited area?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

Agreed, the conclusion of the OP that this means that AGW=0 is premature at best.

But, I wouldn't dismiss the potential significance either. I think your "there is still a warming trend" and "limited to the Continental US" arguments are a little short sighted. First, all warming trends are not the same. If the trend is really half of what was previously calculated, then that IS impacting on the discussion of AGW. Second, if the methodologies used prove valid for the continental US data then there is a high likelihood that they will be applicable to other data sets. They didn't limit this to the US because they think the US is the world, the limited it to the US because that is what they had good data for.

Clearly this is not going to be pretty. Given that Watts and Christy and an apparently unwitting McIntyre are involved and given that Watts basically mocked Muller by pre-releasing it, this is all going to be a real big sticky mess. My prediction is that this has about as much chance of actually getting published as the Muller stuff and ultimately we will be left with some people thinking that UHI has an effect and others saying it doesn't - where we started in the first place.

Regards

[GIThruster]

The fact that there is any warming at all when the sun has been in a cooling trend for 7-8 years is troubling. What do we suppose will happen when the sun goes back into a warming trend in 3-4 years?

[djolds1]

My first clue that Man made global warming was utter Bullsh*t was the fact that it was being pushed by Liberals. I had to ask myself how a group of people who have never been right about anything, could possibly be right about this, but for awhile I was willing to concede the possibility that even a blind squirrel might find an acorn once in a while.

Then I saw the spectra-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and I realized, "Yup. Liberals are idiots. They are wrong about this too."

Look up the Spectral-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and tell me why we aren't an 800 degree inferno, like Venus.

Looking at anything beyond water vapor is a waste of time.

That's a somewhat political way to look at it.

When you realize the same people were screaming about Global Cooling in the '70s and Global Warming in the '90s, while demanding the same policy changes, something looks off.

[ScottL]

The fact that there is any warming at all when the sun has been in a cooling trend for 7-8 years is troubling. What do we suppose will happen when the sun goes back into a warming trend in 3-4 years?

I don't think too many people can deny there is a global rise in temperature and I think what you point out is pretty valid. The argument is about the contribution of humanity towards that rise. My concerns are that we're in a cascading drought which is and will increasingly effect us economically. If the rise continues even at the conservatively low rate and as you put the sun returns to a warming trend, economically that puts a big damper on our nation, let alone the world. The question should be what can we do about it to alleviate such conditions.

[Diogenes]

My first clue that Man made global warming was utter Bullsh*t was the fact that it was being pushed by Liberals. I had to ask myself how a group of people who have never been right about anything, could possibly be right about this, but for awhile I was willing to concede the possibility that even a blind squirrel might find an acorn once in a while.

Then I saw the spectra-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and I realized, "Yup. Liberals are idiots. They are wrong about this too."

Look up the Spectral-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and tell me why we aren't an 800 degree inferno, like Venus.

Looking at anything beyond water vapor is a waste of time.

That's a somewhat political way to look at it.

When you realize the same people were screaming about Global Cooling in the '70s and Global Warming in the '90s, while demanding the same policy changes, something looks off.

They are in favor of any explanation which requires them to take charge of the world. That's all anyone needs to know about claims from that corner of the political spectrum.

[Skipjack]

My first clue that Man made global warming was utter Bullsh*t was the fact that it was being pushed by Liberals.

Now that is scientific!

[palladin9479]

The fact that there is any warming at all when the sun has been in a cooling trend for 7-8 years is troubling. What do we suppose will happen when the sun goes back into a warming trend in 3-4 years?

I don't think too many people can deny there is a global rise in temperature and I think what you point out is pretty valid. The argument is about the contribution of humanity towards that rise. My concerns are that we're in a cascading drought which is and will increasingly effect us economically. If the rise continues even at the conservatively low rate and as you put the sun returns to a warming trend, economically that puts a big damper on our nation, let alone the world. The question should be what can we do about it to alleviate such conditions.

Absolutely nothing, nor should you attempt. Droughts happen, hurricanes happen, all sorts of sh!t happens. We need to stop comparing everything to the last 20 or 30 years, climate cycles don't work in human life times. Look at 100 ~ 1000+ year cycles, and in that sense everything is absolutely normal. The world is getting warmer because we're in that part of the cycle, eventually it'll get colder and so on and so forth. Eventually another ice age will come and will cause mass extinction of life, humanity will be in a real pickle if we're even still here. The thing liberals always f*ck up is that the world is much larger then they are. It's survived cosmic impacts, several ice ages, volcanic eruptions and severe continental drifting. Millions of species of life have been created and destroyed eons before the first human figured out that smacking rocks together over dry leaves created fire. Millions of species of life will be created and destroyed long after we've destroyed ourselves. In retrospect one can see that humans are just another expression of life on this planet, no more and no less. Of course the idea that we are as insignificant as dust in the grand scheme of things absolutely terrorizes liberals.

The first indication I had that AGW was a scam was when the proponents didn't follow their own advice while asking everyone else to give them money.

[randomencounter]

The first indication I had that AGW was a scam was when the proponents didn't follow their own advice while asking everyone else to give them money.

This is about Al Gore actually flying in jets to go to speaking engagements, isn't it?

The confusion of thought necessary to ignore blatant facts just because somebody in the political opposition is taking advantage of them is incomprehensible to me.