Climate Denial Crock of the Week

14 Responses to “Hansen on the New Math of Extreme Events”

1. Jean Mcmahon Says:

   
   August 6, 2012 at 4:01 pm

   NPR News gave some coverage yesterday.They said Hansen is a “strident”speaker,or something like that and I hate how the “News” is covered..Hansen is always measured and kindly when he speaks..I do not know who to complain to..

   Log in to Reply
   • greenman3610 Says:

     
     August 6, 2012 at 9:43 pm

     btw am over the midwest somewhere, dakotas I’m guessing.

     Log in to Reply
2. MorinMoss Says:

   
   August 6, 2012 at 6:36 pm

   As I suspected he would, Watts is trying to dismiss this result as a cherrypicking exercise and manages to plug his own (toilet?) “paper” as well.

   Anthony comments on the NASA animation by Dr. James Hansen of surface temperature trends from 1955-1999:

   There are many issues with this presentation. It seems to be a big Cherry Picking exercise.

   1. Note all of the missing southern hemisphere data. There are operating weather stations during his time, but they are excluded from the analysis. Why?

   2. The period chosen, 1955-1999 leaves out the warmer 1930′s and the cooler 2000′s. Why?

   3. The period from 2000-present has no statistically significant warming. Leaving that period out biases the presentation.

   4. The period chosen exhibits significant postwar growth, urbanization is not considered.

   5. As for severe weather, Hansen ignores the fact that neither tornadoes nor hurricanes have shown any increase recently. Only smaller tornadoes show an increase, due to reporting bias thanks to easily affordable and accessible technology. NOAA’s SPC reports that July 2012 seems to be at a record low for tornadoes.

   6. My latest results in Watts et al 2012 suggest surface station data may be biased warmer over the last 30 years.

   Log in to Reply
3. reggie Says:

   
   August 6, 2012 at 9:07 pm

   @MorinMoss

   Tony Watts is preaching to the choir, truthiness trumps real science at that pseudo-science blog. Watts’ mods snip almost all comments that contradict his alternate version of reality, thus keeping his followers in the dark regarding how far from reality his silly attacks are, it’s only for consumption of the deniers.
   It’s hilarious to read Tony claim it was NASA’s fault he missed the intent of the paper, it was because the press release was too difficult to understand. I agree, it is difficult to understand that press release if one has the reading ability of an eighth grader. Why is obvious is the likely-hood that Watts just read the title and skimmed the rest of the press release. He admits that he didn’t even bother taking the time to read the actual paper before going off is Drama Queen rant against Hansen, what a maroon!

   Log in to Reply