Open Thread


According to Larry Fields: I really like the Open Thread. I don’t have the energy to keep up with the long articles at WUWT and elsewhere. Commenters who provide links in the Open Thread help me prioritize my reading.
first step

17 Responses to Open Thread

  1. jennifer July 21, 2014 at 9:26 am #


    I agree with you, in that we should not have total confidence in Roy Spencer’s satellite record.

    Can you agree with me, we should have even less confidence in the Hadcrut and GISS series?

    I’m not sure if you read my address to the Sydney Institute…

    It would suggest that the GISS dataset you quote above, and in fact all the global data sets, are more than suspect, because of the algorithms they have been applying.

    Perhaps Steve Goddard illustrates the problem a bit more clearly here…

    Can we get some agreement that the GISS and HadCRUT temperatures series have been compromised?

  2. James Mayeau July 21, 2014 at 11:54 am #

    Another body blow for the tree thermometer crew.

    Size and age of plants impact their productivity more than climate, study shows

    UA professor Brian Enquist and postdoctoral researcher Sean Michaletz, along with collaborators Dongliang Cheng from Fujian Normal University in China and Drew Kerkhoff from Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio, have combined a new mathematical theory with data from more than 1,000 forests across the world to show that climate has a relatively minor direct effect on net primary productivity, or the amount of biomass that plants produce by harvesting sunlight, water and carbon dioxide.

    Read more at:

    I’m thinking I tweet this over to Michael Mann. Heh.

  3. Luke July 21, 2014 at 12:37 pm #

    Err was the opposite – the lack of confidence was in RSS and more in UAH?

    UAH lines up with other data sets –

    Jen – I have some confidence in the power of big numbers. It would be unsurprising not to find some issues with some stations – it’s a question of extent. Compromised? or imperfect.

    What one can also do is line up a range of data sets – including SST and NMAT. Change in species behaviour.

    Do they tell a similar story?

    Jeez – a productive exchange with Jen – I feel sorta weird.

  4. jennifer July 21, 2014 at 1:01 pm #


    For this to be productive:

    1. I would like you to articulate my problems with the GISS and HadCrut temperature series.


  5. Luke July 21, 2014 at 4:13 pm #

    Jen I’m not sure I can exactly articulate your problems?

    – despite accusations I hardly ever quote SkS however in this case they have a handy summary of the many people that have been through this, the very many often quoted problems, alternative reconstructions and even using raw data. Answers are all much the same.

    You may have found a few anomalies in adjusted analyses but does it alter the big global picture? e.g. Figure 5. Comparison of global temperatures from raw and adjusted Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) v3 data, 1880–2010 (analysis by Zeke Hausfather).

  6. James Mayeau July 21, 2014 at 4:17 pm #

    Helliker and Richter showed that tree leaves maintain their own temperature. Now Michaletz and Enquist extend that to include the pulp of the tree.

    “This means that plants in warm, wet environments can grow more because their larger size and longer growing season enable them to capture more resources, not because climate increases the speed of their metabolism.”

    Read more at:

    Treerings do not make thermometers. Mounting evidence shows.

  7. BruceC July 21, 2014 at 5:00 pm #

    @ Luke; Well it’s about time sceptics stopped lying on temperature trends – no warming for umpty ump years.

    Who’s lying Luke? Using SkS’s own trend calculator, there has been ZERO warming so far this century (Jan 1st, 2001). As of this post, that is 14 years, 6 months and 21 days.

    GISTEMP – Trend: 0.022 ±0.157 °C/decade (2σ)
    NOAA – Trend: -0.003 ±0.145 °C/decade (2σ)
    HADCRUT4 – Trend: -0.009 ±0.141 °C/decade (2σ)
    BEST – Trend: 0.064 ±0.384 °C/decade (2σ)
    NOAA (land only) – Trend: 0.063 ±0.264 °C/decade (2σ)
    RSS – Trend: -0.060 ±0.252 °C/decade (2σ)
    UAH – Trend: 0.054 ±0.252 °C/decade (2σ)

  8. Mr Koala July 21, 2014 at 5:11 pm #

    The long term temperature trends for most of the continent of Australia show a consistent pattern. Cooling trends from pre-1900 to around 1960, followed by a warming trend from 1960 to present. Plot out the data for yourself if you know how to use Excel, its not difficult. A ten year old Cuban school pupil could do it. Not so great at mathematics here, unfortunately.

    The net effect – not much. So we have cooling with increasing carbon dioxide, followed by warming with increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

    Poor Mr Gore and Mr Flannery. They will have to think up another culprit.

  9. spangled drongo July 21, 2014 at 5:27 pm #

    But doncha luv the Raw v Acorn:

  10. Beth Cooper July 21, 2014 at 5:58 pm #

    Is that ‘raw’ compared to ‘cooked,’ sd?

  11. Luke July 21, 2014 at 6:36 pm #

    pre-1900 data are highly suspect. Thermometers 101.

    P.S. Don’t mention the minima – shhhhhh

  12. Mr Koala July 21, 2014 at 6:56 pm #

    I think its all suspect – its the drink.

  13. sp July 21, 2014 at 7:27 pm #

    Luke: “pre-1900 data are highly suspect. Thermometers 101”

    The data starts at 1950 – reading and compreension 101 Luke.

  14. Luke July 21, 2014 at 7:45 pm #

    Sp – July 21, 2014 at 5:11 pm – do try to keep up !

  15. jennifer July 21, 2014 at 7:51 pm #


    The detail matters, the integrity of the data matters.

    Nothing is more basic to science than the integrity of the received evidence.

    As someone with apparently no concept of right and wrong you are not welcome here any longer.

    Please desist from posting at this blog.

  16. jennifer July 21, 2014 at 7:54 pm #

    You don’t have to see the whole staircase, just the first step. Be gone with scoundrels from this blog.


    This thread is now closed.

Website by 46digital