A Scientist Says Temperature Data is Suspect

Here is a scientist who is skeptical about the validity of temperature data. That is, we may not really know IF the Earth's atmosphere is warming. What is the Earth's "normal" temperature, or it's "normal" seal level? Actually there is no such thing as normal because it is constantly changing. He says a lot more interesting things. Read on.
Peter

From:
February 21, 2007
04:06:13 pm, Categories: Earth Science, Environment, Ethics and Science, Global Warming and Climate Change, Politics and Science, Public Policy, Education, 754 words The Gore Effect

From "tom"
My goodness, the measurement of the .6C +/- .2C change in a 100yrs+ or so is taken as absolute fact. The measurement of a global mean temp by the use of surface sensors is pretty close to pure folly. Each individual sensor measures nothing more than the immediate micro climate around the sensor. Taking a sensors data and statistically extrapolating it to represent 100s if not 1000s of km2 of surface area is not a simple task and then merging this data with proxy data is even more complex.

Yet we take these numbers as if they are solid...well I don't but the IPCC does. These numbers are not solid...if the .6C change has a +/- .2C margin of error, that means we have a potential margin of error of .4C absolute. Yet, all we hear in the news is how EVERYTHING is caused by global warming. It's really disgusting to this scientist. What is NOT known is much larger than what IS known with respect to climate science.

The IPCC got rid of the HOCKEY STICK graph for their 4th assessment...why? It was so prominently played in the last assessment..what changed? The NAS debunked it for all practical purposes, that's why. Because the Medieval times were warmer than today in all likelihood, without increased CO2.

Historical temperature reconstruction is an INexact science. Global Climate Models are far from predicting the future. The scientific method in all of this popular discussion seems to be missing. I am at my wits end and this "science" publication has gone so far off of the scientific roadway as to deem it a laughable publication...especially this current article I am responding to. Wow.

CO2 lags temperature change in the ice core data. Many studies (accepted in scientific journals worldwide) show this. Temperature changes first then co2 follows in the ice core data. Co2 is not a driver of temperature change in paleoclimate study. It likely has some effect due to its radiative properties, but the Sun/Cosmic rays and other climate drivers likely outweigh co2's effect by magnitudes.

Mixing politics, pop culture with a scientific subject in its infancy is dangerous...it is dangerous because of what the alarmists claim we need to do...we don't even have the methodology to measure the change in temps if KYOTO were to be implemented entirely. Yet the economic effects would be huge.

When push comes to shove and you the general public realizes how much money this charade will cost them they will revolt. Right now it is all just mass media hyperbole and most people don't really give a hoot. Al Gore is an opportunist and leftist Hollywood along with the willing mainstream media are playing the ultimate hypocrites.