Politics from the Palouse to Puget Sound

Thursday, August 16, 2007

"Incontrovertible" Proof

The cover of this month's Scientific American proclaims "The Undeniable Case for Global Warming."

Last week, the Goracle told an audience in Singapore that research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world's largest carbon polluters, like ExxonMobil.

We can now add NASA to the list of "misinformers."

Steve McIntyre, who operates the web site climateaudit.org, was curious about the famous "hockey stick" that shows global temperatures sharply increasing between 1999 and 2000. So he decided to check the math. However, James Hansen, the former head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and "Father of Global Warming" (also a vocal critic of the Bush Administration and a Democratic activist) refused to give McIntypre the algorithm he used to compute the chart. So McIntyre reverse-engineered it himself. Turns out the climate data reported by NASA was skewed by the infamous Y2K Bug and no one had caught it before now.

Red-faced NASA scientists quietly corrected the data (seen any MSM stories about this?) Turns out the hottest year on record is no longer 1998, but 1934. In fact, fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II.

Science blogger Michael Asher wrote:
The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought), but the effect on the U.S. global warming propaganda machine could be huge.
You can say that again. If there is a "conspiracy" about global warming, I think this shows where it lies.

HT: Bruce Heimbigner

1 comment:

Satanic Mechanic said...

Scientific American went to hell about eight years ago. It quit being scientific and started being a political pro-green publication. I read an issue last year and all it did was blame capitalism, America, Bush, cars, and western countries for everything under the sun.
It used to be a good publication but many professionals now do not even touch it for its lack of science. There are not many wide spread general scientific publications around, usually just publications in specific fields of science and engineering.