Lack of lack of ocean warming

RP Sr has been pushing his favourite climate change metric - ocean temperatures - and hyping one paper - Lyman et al, that appeared to show a cooling in that metric. It seemed to me rather imprudent to do this based on one untested paper; now unexpected support comes from Lyman et al themselves who have discovered biases in their data. So... RPs argument collapses. This is rather reminiscent of the "lets use the MSU" crowd, who touted its suerior reliability over the sfc record, before discovering - oops - that their favourite Spencer+Christy version was wrong.

Also rather amusingly, RP used the Lyman paper as an example of an "error" in IPCC ar4. As I pointed out, the Lyman paper was beyond the IPCC cutoff (and he was wrong about the rest as well). So I'm sure he will be correcting his scitizen column very soon now.

More like this

RP Sr's one-man kamikaze attack against the IPCC continues. RPs point appears to be that the IPCCs forcing-since-1750 of +1.6 W/m2 is not compatible with a current imbalance of about 0.85 W/m2. Sadly RPs link to the Hansen paper concerned is currently broken so I'm somewhat guessing what this…
Asks RP Sr's paper in GRL (or rather, ask Thomas N. Chase, Klaus Wolter, Roger A. Pielke Sr and Ichtiaque Rasool). Interestingly, they conclude "not really". This of course is contrary to what everyone knows, so their paper has been ignored, to RP's annoyance. And if I had demonstrasted…
No, don't worry, I'm not giving up. Its is a quote, provided somewhat tactlessly by the normally urbane Crandles: All of this will soon be moot, anyway. Since last year we have been working on v6.0 of the UAH datasets which should be ready with the tropospheric temperature datasets before summer is…
Well thats what RP Sr sez. Although he immeadiately gets cold feet and adds "Or, At Best Cherrypicking". I think he should make up his mind - if he is going to throw around a rather hard term like "errors" in the title he shouldn't wimp out to "or at best..." a moment later. So, first off, does he…

Dear William,
I just wonder, who of the trio - Richard Lintzen, Fred Singer and Roger Pielke - is the best :-)

Well, ocean temperature is an obsession for one, inaccuracies in climate models or inadequate troposphere warming (0.6C instead of 1.3C) are obsession for others...

I think it's like between evolutionists and creationist - whatever is not terribly and exactly explained by evolution theory, makes the whole thoeory wrong in the eyes of creationsist... ;-)

Another metric: The number of people using a single paper to push their contrarian/denialist views.



I seem to recall that RP Sr. was caught out in the open some time ago by a gang of rogue climate scientists and forced on pain of derision to admit that he agrees with the consensus. FWIW.

By Steve Bloom (not verified) on 18 Apr 2007 #permalink