Roy Spencer fitting an elephant

Barry Bickmore’s three part review of Roy Spencer’s Great Global Warming Blunder is well worth a read. In Part 1 he examines Spencer’s model that supposedly shows that climate sensitivity is low. In Part 2 he looks at Spencer’s claim that climate scientists ignore natural sourcs of climate variation. And Part 3 takes apaprt Spencer’s claim that his climate model, which has four fitted parameters, shows that the PDO and not an increase in greenhouse gasses is the major cause of climate change since 1900.

I’m reminded of the quote from John von Neumann:

With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.

Update: Arthur Smith analyzes Spencer’s model.

Update 2: Arthur Smith does some more analysis. Spencer’s model is out by six trillion degrees if you hindcast it to 993 AD.

Comments

  1. #1 adelady
    March 11, 2011

    Harold “If a wheat farmer has to pay a 30% tax on nat gas used for drying freshly-harvested grain to the required moisture content for storage,…”

    And if carbon taxes, and common sense, speed up the development of affordable spray-on solar coating for the processing and storage facility, farmers will pay no, nil, zilch dollars for fuel to run this activity. And maybe the facility will earn dollars the rest of the year when the power generated is not needed for operations – thus allowing cost **reductions** to the farmers.

    Cheaper grain for bread! Who’da thunk it.

  2. #2 adelady
    March 11, 2011

    Speaking of Texas, check out the sea level rise statistics.

    http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8771450

    Several similar reading for other Texas gauges, some a good deal less.

  3. #3 Chris O'Neill
    March 11, 2011

    Harold Pierce Jr:

    By analyzing a number of time series of data influenced by climate, they found that the earth has global climate cycles of 50-70 years with an average of about 60 years

    This would mean it was was just as warm 50-70 years ago as it is now.

    You must think we’re as stupid as you are.

  4. #4 Ian Forrester
    March 11, 2011

    Harold Pierce Jr, you have spent too long in your organic chemistry lab with the caps removed from the solvent bottles. These nasty chemicals are not good for your neurons, that is if you have any left since your postings continually show you to be neuronally challenged.

    Cherry picking is not science. The “G” in AGW stands for “global” not cherry picked stations.

  5. #5 Harold Pierce Jr.
    March 11, 2011

    Yeah! The Deltoid Dingo Dogs are on the attack! I love It! You dogs are the only bloggers with spirit and sass.

    ATTN: adelady

    The average wheat harvest in Canada is 25 million tons. Only fossil fuels can provide the enormous amount of energy to dry this grain. Millions of tons of barely and rye are grown for making beer and whisky. Millions of tons of oats corn are grown mostly for food.

    How much wheat and rice is grown in Oz for export? Go look it up. Then go to a wheat farmer and tell him about your idea for drying grain for export.

    Do you have any idea how much diesel fuel is used by unit trains of ca 100-150 cars to bring the grain as well as sulfur, met coal and potash to Vancouver for export. It usually takes 4 or 5 D-E units to get the train over the Rockie mnts.

    You really don’t know what you are taking about.

    Check a map of Canada. There are only a possible 8 hours of sunlight in winter if there is no snow or clouds. In winter temperatures in the prairies go well below 0 deg C and somtimes down into -30 to -40 deg C range for days.

  6. #6 zoot
    March 11, 2011

    When I worked on the wheat bins no farmer dried wheat before deliveringing it to us.

  7. #7 Robert Murphy
    March 12, 2011

    First you use the behavior of Pacific salmon as a proxy for temperature, now you use Texas as a proxy for the world, even though it comprises a little more than .001 percent of the Earth’s surface area. You’re still reading tea leaves Harry. When you decide to look at *all* the data, let us know. :)

  8. #8 Holly Stick
    March 12, 2011

    In Alberta, farmers try to harvest the grain when the weather is dry, so the grain will be better quality and fetch a higher price. I don’t know if very many have to use fans or whatever to dry the grain. Perhaps that is a more recent practice, or it’s only needed if the grain is tough.

    On the salmon, Harold is simplifying a complicated issue including the question of farm salmon passing parasites to wild salmon, various political issues, etc.

    There was an unusually large salmon run this year, but I’m not sure the scientists are certain of the explanation.

    And I wonder if someone has data showing if the ocean in the area cooled last year?
    http://www.wildsalmonpeople.ca/
    http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/

  9. #9 Holly Stick
    March 12, 2011

    And the prairies get more sunshine than other parts of Canada, but actually less than Harold suggested:

    http://www.livingin-canada.com/sunshine-hours-canada.html

  10. #10 Eli Rabett
    March 13, 2011

    Harold is being rolling the eyes stupid about how CO2 varies locally. Local CO2 concentrations are measured all the time and vary wildly because of photosynthesis and respiration of plants, combustion and burning. Ferdinand Engelbeen has a nice illustration of how CO2 can vary ~100 ppm over a day under such influences, which was the whole point of measuring at Mauna Loa where these effects are not important

  11. #11 MikeH
    March 13, 2011

    An article by Barry Bickmore responding to Senator Minchin’s claim that the world is cooling has been published on the ABC web site [here](http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/45086.html).

    I assumed that Minchin was getting his information from a gnome at the bottom of his garden but Bickmore suspects that it is Roy Spencer.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.