• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Jennifer Marohasy

Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

  • Home
  • About
  • Publications
  • Speaker
  • Blog
  • Temperatures
  • Coral Reefs
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Correction from David Douglass to Ken Miles

July 5, 2005 By jennifer

I received the following email yesterday from David Douglass, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, New York:

Dear Dr Marohasy

The following quote from your web page has come to my attention:

“A good example of skeptics cherry picking is ‘Altitude dependence of atmospheric temperature trends: Climate models versus observation’ by David Douglass, Benjamin Pearson and Fred Singer (Geophysical Research Letters, 2004, Volume 31, Page L13208).

Here the authors claim to compare modeled and observed atmospheric temperature changes.
A nice idea in theory.
But in practice, the data set which they compare the modeling results against has been cherry picked in three ways.

[1] There are a number of different attempts to determine atmospheric temperature trends. They pick the only one that shows a cooling influence.

[2] The authors of this attempt to determine atmospheric temperature trends have since refined their algorithms, the new dataset shows warming. Their new data is ignored.

[3] They end their analysis in 1996. Had they included the extra data, the dataset would have shown warming.“(end of quote)

You have not read this paper very carefully (attached).

I will comment on your 3 points.

[1] Which atmospheric trend sets showing warming have we ignored? I believe that I have read all of the relevant papers and am not aware of a single measurement supporting positive trends in the troposphere. Please send reference to such papers.

[2] Who are the authors? Not us. You may mean other attempts to analyze the satellite data. If so, then Christy has shown that those attempts are flawed and that the UAH results stand. The UAH satellites only gives us one point. What about the other two independent data sets showing disagreement with the models?

[3] We explained why we only showed the results to 1996. However, we did do the whole range and found very little difference (read the paper).

I do not mind being called a skeptical scientist, but it is not too accurate because the word skeptic as used in the climate debate implies being against.

I prefer just “scientist”. In physics the word scientist, without adjective, has an invariant meaning. It means one who searches for scientific truth by comparing observations against hypothesis — if there is disagreement, the hypothesis is wrong.

However, in this field of climate research there evidently is more than one kind of scientist and adjectives seem to be necessary. If forced, then I choose “agnostic” for myself because I do not know which hypothesis is correct. That is why I am working in the field of climate research right now.

Sincerely
David Douglass
Department of Physics and Astronomy

I have emailed David explaining that the comment was posted by Ken Miles, not myself as he had assumed. And I wrote that I would post his response – which is what you have just read. The comment from Ken followed my post of 18th April titled “Warwick Hughes” and can be read here
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/000559.html.

Ken ended with the comment, “Climate change skeptics may say that they are just after the truth, but in the vast majority of cases (I can only think of two prominent exceptions) it simply isn’t true.”

I ask, “Which pot is calling which kettle black?”.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Climate & Climate Change

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Ender says

    July 6, 2005 at 10:33 am

    From the web page http://www.ssmi.com/msu/msu_data_description.html of the sensing team, their analysis of the MSU data shows a warming trend.

    “We have found that the temperature of the middle troposphere is warming by approximately 0.133 K/decade . We calculate that MSU channel TMT data published by Christy and Spencer (vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2/) contains a smaller warming trend of approximately 0.049 K/decade”

    On this site are many links to studies that show warming of the upper troposphere.

    It also mentions the C&S study. C&S have revised their data very recently and this is the result.

    Year 5.2 5.1
    1992 0.0009 -0.0005
    1993 -0.0025 -0.0046
    1994 -0.0017 -0.0045
    1995 0.0015 -0.0014
    1996 0.0021 -0.0008
    1997 0.0028 -0.0001
    1998 0.0099 0.0070
    1999 0.0089 0.0058
    2000 0.0080 0.0046
    2001 0.0090 0.0054
    2002 0.0108 0.0072
    2003 0.0117 0.0080

    S&C data clearly shows a warming trend from 1998 onward. This is an summary from http://mustelid.blogspot.com/2005/07/more-satellite-stuff-including.html
    that was done from their data.

  2. Louis Hissink says

    July 16, 2005 at 10:03 pm

    Which is less that the resolution of any thermal measuring device.

    Hence the data shown above, while accurately computed, are that, numerical results which cannot be tested by experiment as we have no instruments to measure these minute quanta.

    Another classic case of “how many angels could one fit on a pinhead”

    Might be a trend Ender, but it is a meaningless trend when one considers physical reality.

Primary Sidebar

Latest

Complicating the IPCC Planck Feedback, Plank #4 of Climate Resilience Theory

June 1, 2025

The Moon’s Tidal Push

May 30, 2025

How Climate Works. In Discussion with Philip Mulholland about Carbon Isotopes

May 14, 2025

In future, I will be More at Substack

May 11, 2025

How Climate Works: Upwellings in the Eastern Pacific and Natural Ocean Warming

May 4, 2025

Recent Comments

  • Don Gaddes on The Moon’s Tidal Push
  • ironicman on The Moon’s Tidal Push
  • cohenite on The Moon’s Tidal Push
  • Don Gaddes on The Moon’s Tidal Push
  • Karen Klemp on The Moon’s Tidal Push

Subscribe For News Updates

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

PayPal

July 2005
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Jun   Aug »

Archives

Footer

About Me

Jennifer Marohasy Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method. Read more

Subscribe For News Updates

Subscribe Me

PayPal

Contact Me

To get in touch with Jennifer call 0418873222 or international call +61418873222.

Email: J.Marohasy@climatelab.com.au

Connect With Me

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · Genesis - Jen Marohasy Custom On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in