Judy Curry simply does not understand the problem with the global temperature record, and how it has been altered.
The way the temperature record has been altered over time is through station selection and loss of rural stations. It used to look like this, when there were a lot of rural stations being used.
But eighty percent of GHCN stations have been lost since the 1970’s
Almost all of the remaining long term rural stations are in the US. The rest of the global temperature record has been contaminated by increasing the ratio of urban stations to rural stations.
The only meaningful large area temperature record on the planet is in the US, and it has been massively tampered with.
All recent US warming is due to infilling fake data
Judy is focused on the mathematical adjustments to the current data, and doesn’t understand the nature of the problem – the current station selection is skewed towards warming. There has been massive divergence between the surface record, satellites, and radiosonde.
Prior to the 1970’s, radiosonde and the surface temperature record matched – but loss of stations since the 1970’s has caused a massive divergence.
A classic science error is to launch into detailed math, before understanding the nature of the problem. More than 50% of the current surface temperature record is fake. How can anyone take it seriously?
It is silly to add personal invective to this discussion.
Dr Curry certainly has the chops to understand the problems, so why the gratuitous slam.
You make a stronger case by just highlighting the decimation of the rural reporting worldwide and the adjustments of the US records.
Look at her web site.
I did, and could not believe the naiveté, or whatever it was that she was displaying.
She (and her cronies) display a total avoidance of the real argument; most likely because they’re incapable of disproving it; distraction is the tactic of many alarmists.
Allow me to point out the biggest hole in this entire arguement: it goes to the point of the disappearing weather stations.
Global land area = 149 million km2. If we put one commercial weather station every 100km2 we would need 1,490,000 stations to cover the planet. Lets call it $5,000 per wireless commercial weather station (that is retail). We could carpet bomb the planet with accurate, state of the art wireless weather stations for $7.5 billion.
If this is the largest catastrophy facing mankind, could we not spend that paultry amount to eliminate this whole data question? Please.
The climate gatekeepers are eliminating weather stations because ‘lack of transparency is a huge political advantage’.
Forget about UHI, just measure everything.
Dr Curry also has a vested interest in NOT understanding the temperature problem.
Judith is a died in the Wool Warmist who wants to be ready to jump to a soft landing if/when the fraud is exposed. Here is an example from September of last year JC at the National Press Club (Just before the Climate talks in NYC) it links to a November 2010 article Uncertainty gets a seat at the “big table:” Part IV
STATEMENT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
This makes it very clear the lady is as much a politician as she is a scientist and she has no intention that ‘Climate Scientists’ lose their limelight.
Remember what was happening in the time leading up to that Congressional Hearing.
It is useful to put the events of that time up front to understand WHY she might have decided to ‘adjust’ her thinking:
1. In November of 2009 the Climategate e-mails were released.
2. On February 2, 2010 on the BBC nightly news of all places it is announced: “The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has presided over a series of damaging blunders, but how and why has so much gone wrong?” news(DOT)bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8494793.stm
3. On March of 2010 Donna Laframboise called for crowd-sourcing help in going over the 2007 IPCC report. In mid April the report card is delivered: “21 of 44 chapters in the United Nations’ Nobel-winning climate bible earned an F “ for using gray literature.
In other words the IPCC and its related ClimAstrologists went from Nobel Prize Winning to a laughing stock. So in November Judith is called on to testify “TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES”
At that point she has made the decision to hop up onto the fence and she does so.
If you look at what Judith Curry said in her congressional testimony you can see she is squarely on the side of the IPCC with an eye to providing damage control, to schmoozing bloggers and ‘citizen scientists’ and to feathering her own nest.
Uncertainty gets a seat at the “big table:” Part IV
STATEMENT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
….Climate change can be categorized as a “wicked problem.”[1] Wicked problems are difficult or impossible to solve, there is no opportunity to devise an overall solution by trial and error, and there is no real test of the efficacy of a solution to the wicked problem….
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovern-mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have framed the climate change problem (i.e. dangers) and its solution (i.e. international treaty) to be irreducibly global. Based upon the precautionary principle, the UNFCCC ’s Kyoto Protocol has established an international goal of stabilization of the concentrations of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere….
In a rational discussion of climate change, the question needs to be asked as to whether the framing of the problem and the early articulation of a preferred policy option by the UNFCCC has marginalized research on broader issues surrounding climate change, and resulted is an overconfident assessment of the importance of greenhouse gases in future climate change, and stifled the development of a broader range of policy options.
The IPCC/UNFCCC have provided an important service to global society by alerting us to a global threat that is potentially catastrophic. The UNFCCC/IPCC has made an ambitious attempt to put a simplified frame around the problem of climate change and its solution in terms of anthropogenic forcing and CO2 stabilization polices. However, the result of this simplified framing of a wicked problem is that we lack the kinds of information to more broadly understand climate change and societal vulnerability.….
Anthropogenic climate change is a theory in which the basic mechanism is well understood, but in which the magnitude of the climate change is highly uncertain owing to feedback processes.…
…The IPCC’s efforts to consider uncertainty focus primarily on communicating uncertainty, rather than on characterizing and exploring uncertainty in a way that would be useful for risk managers and resource managers and the institutions that fund science….
A person making a statement about uncertainty or degree of doubt is likely to become categorized as a skeptic or denier or a “merchant of doubt,”[5] whose motives are assumed to be ideological or motivated by funding from the fossil fuel industry. My own experience in publicly discussing concerns about how uncertainty is characterized by the IPCC has resulted in my being labeled as a “climate heretic”[6] that has turned against my colleagues….
Moving forward
Climate scientists have made a forceful argument for a looming future threat from anthropogenic climate change.
Why do I say: “…Regional planners and resource managers need high-resolution regional climate projections to support local climate adaptation plans and plans for climate compatible development….” is the MONEY QUOTE?
I say that because that is where Judith Curry is making her money!
What is CLIMATE FORECAST APPLICATIONS NETWORK, LLC?
A limited Liability Corporation with Judith Curry at it’s head scamming Americans.
Another question is why does Judith Curry host a somewhat neutral Climate Blog?
This is where the lady shows she is a brilliant politician.
Going back to her congressional testimony she says in her opening paragraph: “Over the past year, I have been actively engaging with the public (particularly in the blogosphere) on the issue of integrity of climate science, and also the topic of uncertainty.”
She decides that muddying the waters with the truth is an excellent idea when you are trying to regain public trust.
Finally we come to Judith Curry and her involvement with the BEST temperature data set. thinkprogress.org said of the Berkeley team back in 2011. “Curry mainly seems on the team to give Muller the thinnest veneer of climatology”
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/best_curry_pr.jpg
October 31, 2011 cartoon by Josh.
As Stephen Rasey said at the time on October 31, 2011 at 9:16 am
Interesting question isn’t it?
So for the skeptics she appears to disagree with Muller but then we find an interesting paper from 2013 it is written by the Berkeley team plus Judith Curry and Mosher.
Influence of Urban Heating on the Global Temperature Land Average using Rural Sites Identified from MODIS Classifications
Abstract
The effect of urban heating on estimates of global average land surface temperature is studied by applying an urban-rural classification based on MODIS satellite data to the Berkeley Earth temperature dataset compilation of 36,869 sites from 15 different publicly available sources. We compare the distribution of linear temperature trends for these sites to the distribution for a rural subset of 15,594 sites chosen to be distant from all MODISidentified urban areas. While the trend distributions are broad, with one-third of the stations in the US and worldwide having a negative trend, both distributions show significant warming. Time series of the Earth’s average land temperature are estimated using the Berkeley Earth methodology applied to the full dataset and the rural subset; the difference of these is consistent with no urban heating effect over the period 1950 to 2010, with a slope of -0.10 ± 0.24/100yr (95% confidence).
She also hosted Zeke Hausefeather hatchet job on Steve in July of 2014. — Understanding Adjustments to Temperature Data.
We all know who specializes in US temperature trends.
….
Then there is the trick played on Anthony Watts. Remember Curry wants to drag the Deniers on board the CAGW bandwagon.
New independent surface temperature record in the works
by Anthony Watts
A new release from Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature July 29, 2012
Again by Steven Mosher and Zeke Hausfather and hosted by Judith.
Judith’s comment:
That was in 2012 and in 2013 Judith and the BEST team came out with the paper at the top of this comment.
So given all that background does Judith Curry not understand, or does her funding depend on her not understanding?
Upton Sinclair — “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Gail Combs –
Your ability to compile, compare, and analyze documentation (and underlying evidence of timing, “coincidence”, and probable motivation) is most remarkable.
Mark Steyn could surely use your talents in the inexorable Mann-suit
Keep up the GREAT work!
geologyjim, Thank you.
I know I have a tendency to run on and on but it is difficult not to when you are ‘hot on the scent’
I am glad at least some have the patience to read what I write/compile.
Gail, you have quite successfully taken apart Judith Curry’s reputation for me. 🙂 You sniff out the detail like a forensic rottweiler.
Sophie,
I have always been a bit suspicious of Judith. She always seemed too good to be true. However I never thought I would trip over something like her partner and the Aspen Global Change Institute with its connections to Mikey Mann, Peter Glieck and the rest.
Yes Gail, I was actually thinking about that connection with Michael Mann-ipulation, after all, didn’t he accuse her of being anti-science? Now, thanks to you, we know there is a close, underlying connection between these two. Aww, I think I may buy her two mirrors for Christmas………………one for each face!
I was a bit of a fan of JC but I will look at her site differently now. Admire you energy btw.
I stole this and added it to my site:
http://www.hyzercreek.com/hoax.htm
“But in truth with more complicated instances there is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain.” – A.N.Whitehead, An Introduction to Mathematics, 1911, p. 27.
We are supposed to take the word of Curry that the world is ending because of C02 yet she can’t do basic math or statistics. And even when you lay it out for her and the rest of the Climate Liars in a manner even the dimmest of them should be able to comprehend, they still don’t get it. The stupidity of these so-called experts is appalling. They never learn. They don’t want to learn. Their lies and cult-like beliefs are more important to them than doing real science.
It is called ‘willful ignorance’. Fingers in ears, and babbling.
Let us assume (as a hypothetical) that global warming, i.e. a long term rise in average temperatures around the globe, were actually taking place. Let us assume that everyone on earth agreed that temperatures were rising. Let us even assume that the rise appeared to be increasing and catastrophic. Would those things justify regulating CO2?
The answer is “No!” Why? Because the distinctive marker for CO2 induced warming — as opposed to long term natural cycles, cosmic rays, increased solar output, etc. — is that there would be a hot spot in the upper troposphere. No hot spot has been observed. Instead all measurements have shown a distinct lack of hot spot. Quite literally, EVEN IF WE ASSUMED ALL THE HYPOTHETICALS ABOVE, the one thing we could be sure about is that whatever was causing the warming, it for darn sure was NOT CO2.
No troposphere hot spot — no CO2 caused warming.
I would not be so quick to condemm her to hell.She is in fact a voluntary skeptic, but probably cannot go the full blast due to fear of loss of employment, colleagues ect. Its quite understandable. However they are all going to lose big time and I think they are beginning to realize it now. The above BTW, complete answers concisely and in a simple manner the whole BS drivel posted by Zeke ect to confuse/defend their position and GISS ect who are now in a very precarious position due to the fact the MSM is coping on to the fraud ect. . These people are paid to defend the Fraud, they have to do it. LOL
You mean she’s Chicken Sh*t to say anything against her peers?
I would have agreed a few months ago but then I found her company that is making money off grants to provide expertise for determining the best sites for of all things wind turbines.
Curry says ” I have been a fairly active participant in the blogosphere since 2006″ This is the same time she and Dr. Peter J. Webster set up CFAN. [Webster is a member of the Aspen Global Change Institute***?!?]
SEE COMMENT
She identified skeptics/Deniers and Blogs as the new threat to her livelihood and has moved to neutralize it.
Not only does she SUPPORT bat-chomping bird-slicing eco-crucifixes that are taking out endangered American Raptors, she, as an LLC, is ripping off the American tax payer to the tune of a cool 1.2 million. This does not include the consulting fees. Consulting fees to a private corporation are a great way to hide pay offs for services that no one wants anyone to trace.
As I said she is a very politically savvy lady.
http://www.sbir.gov/about/about-sttr
http://www.sbir.gov/
More on Curry: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html
****FUNDING for Aspen Global Change Institute :
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
The National Science Foundation (NSF)
The Department of Energy (DOE)
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Analysis, Integration, and Modeling of the Earth System (AIMES) / International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP)
When you pull the Aspen Global Change Institute thread things get real interesting… I feel like I am tracing Machiavelli.
WHAT WE DO
And guess who is on the staff of Climate Communication?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Peter Gleick
Katharine Hayhoe
Michael Mann
Jeff Masters
Michael Oppenheimer
Naomi Oreskes
Jonathan Overpeck
Benjamin Santer
Kevin Trenbreth
Don Wuebbles
To name just a few.
>>>>>>>>>>>
How did I find this connection? You will die laughing – From Judith Curry’s website.
This is a few bits and pieces but I suggest reading the whole comment
Do read the rest of the comment. It is full of other interesting quotes.
Anything that the federal government gets involved in is useless. The article I linked below is from JAMA internal Medicine Journal. It details a study that the FDA researched and found evidence of data altering, fraud, manipulation of facts and conclusions. The Journals of none of these publish fraudulent papers retracted them even after the fraud was pointed out to the editors. and none of the authors of these fraudulent papers were prosecuted by the FDA or any other government agency, even thought these studies put the participants at risk of death and any doctor who used these peer review treatments put patients at risk. Why would any one believe anything that had any kind of government oversight to be worth anything. And why would anyone believe in peer reviewed papers.
Research Misconduct Identified by the US Food and Drug Administration
Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Out of the Peer-Reviewed
Literaturehttp://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=2109855
sorry the link was unclear
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=2109855
That study is jaw dropping. Why the heck are we paying these bureauRats?
What’s more appalling is that we are told to believe the peer reviewed studies, because they are “PEER REVIEWED”. And our government through the FDA still allows them to be in the journals, uncontested , So much for the protection of the public health.
I really wish I had that bit of evidence a decade ago when fighting the Food Safety Modernization Act that will regulate independent farmers into bankruptcy… the ones left after the World Trade Organization and the Freedom to Fail Farm bill.
One you realize that the US bureaucracy is only there to protect the interest of select corporations (Government monopolies if you will) then every thing becomes clear.
SEE: E. M. Smith’s comment on corporations and regulations:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/forget-gen-x-now-its-generation-hot/#comment-14483
And an example of how the system works:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1995/07/dwaynes-world
Do I understand correctly that station dropout causes rural stations to be adjusted upwards for recent times? Does this affect the 1930s bump too?
I suspect that the current choice of stations is much more urban than what used to be used in these analyses. Missing rural data is currently being infilled with urban data.
Trying to wrap my mind around why that would affect pre-1940 temps. I take it these adjustment algorithms are not published.
The choice of stations has changed from earlier analyses. They used to have more rural stations
Bobby,
Try this explanation of what happen to the Canadian data:
https://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2010/04/11/canada-top-of-the-hockey-league-part-1/
Thanks Gail.
Bobby look around that website near that article. Lots and Lots of info.
Enjoy.
So the purpose of getting raw temp data is to see if the Earth is warming.
There is much data missing from stations.
To solve that problem of not having data, they estimate what that data “should” have been — then then they call that “raw data” to check if the Earth is warming.
Isn’t that like computing the average human temperature from a sample of people, but some of the temp data is missing, so some people’s “temperatures” is an estimate based upon other peoples’ temperatures? WTF.
Curry looks at about 1% of the problem, and then concludes that 1% is not significant. Her site is useless.
Dr. Curry is a Climate Establishment Insider. Don’t let anybody trick you into thinking otherwise.
Andrew
O/T but I really do not know whether to laugh or cry at this one….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYAe8wEdILI
Current temp Asuncion 37.8C 12.53PM, here just 32 Km away (digital thermometer under shade 33C tells you everything you need to know. BTW they are probably being paid to keep it up. LOL
Link http://espanol.wunderground.com/global/stations/86218.html
Judy needs the gravy train to keep rolling.
” The short-term market potential of a resulting Phase II solution is estimated to be in excess of $5M.”
Not a bad potential when split between 9 people.
It is worth mentioning that the climate models fit the 1975 temperature history perfectly. The same climate models also perfectly fit the latest, and completely different, temperature history. The climate models have so many free parameters, they can fit any curve and hence they should be considered pretty useless for prediction.
“With four parameters I can ?t an eiephant, and with ?ve [ can make him wiggle his trunk.” ~ Johnny Von. Neumanm
FYI, here is a nice documentary on Von Neumann. Brilliant! And apparently a nice guy as well. Do not miss the interview at the end where Edward Teller talks about his friend, Johnny…
https://www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=VTS9O0CoVng
By the way, is the kid at 6:30 who it sounds like?
There has never been a problem with the climate. It is just one of the countless ways to create fear so that the few can control the many.
If this one does not achieve its goal they just continue with another one.
It has always been quite easy to control the masses. Just give them bread and games or promise them heaven or virgins and they will fight a war and die for you.
The surface station data is not fit for use.
I’m not sure what we’re suppose to be missing if the radiosonde and satellite data show little or no warming in the atmosphere but the surface station data shows more but still not much; and even after massive massaging the surface-station data still shows less than the computer models forecast.
This whole thing is looking more and more like a game.
The data sets should match up within some range – not diverge over time.
Reblogged this on 4timesayear's Blog.