By Richard Muller on December 17, 2003
Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate. I would love to believe that the results of Mann et al. are correct, and that the last few years have been the warmest in a millennium.
Muller has a new hockey stick. (He was just angry that Mikey beat him too it.)
www.scitechnol.com/2327-4581/2327-4581-1-101.pdf
I overlaid the 1975 National Academy of Sciences graph on Muller’s graph, and saw the usual junk – i.e. the post 1040’s global cooling is almost gone.
Same story with Hansen 1981 in black below. Something has happened to the post 1950 temperature record, since the 1970’s-1980’s.
Reblogged this on Catholic Glasses.
A little tweaky-weaky here, a tweaky-weaky there, and voila! Warming a la carte!
Hel-loooo!! Did anyone actually read the MIT article? Muller rips seven kinds of shit out of the hockey stick. Muller is one of the good guys. He is not a rabid warmist. Why are you morons beating on him?
He wanted to be the guy behind the hockey stick, and was pissed off that Mann beat him to it.
Muller is, and always has been, a catastrophist. He’s been able to play is so disant skepticism into a large funding score from his university and some cash from others, and used this to pronounce himself a “converted” skeptic. But those of us who have followed his statements for years knew that Muller was never a skeptic, he simply was positioning himself to look good by pretending to be for a short period, hoping we’d miss everything he’s said before and after.
Muller’s statements are well-documented. We know him well. And he’s produced one more badly flawed temperature analysis.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
Given his statement a decade ago quoted above, what would you require from him to consider him a “rabid” warmist?
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
Hah. The phrase was “his soi disant skepticism.”
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
What’s hilarious is that BEST shows the raw data plots, none of which resemble the final hockey stick.
Each station is made to match ( but not adjusted!) an imaginary “regional expectation”… which of course is nothing like the measured temperatures in that region. From what Mosh says it sounds like they break each record apart and then realign them into a hockey stick.
On a different topic, being a bit bored now that all of the Arctic and Antarctic ships of fools have been trapped and rescued in turn by fossil fueled vehicles for another year, I decided to visit our old friends at http://www.mainlinefirstlast.com. Which led me to pictures of polar bears and when one thing led to another, I came across this site:
http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/status/
Click on the status page and you’ll see that, for some reason, they’re hiding their population data. Now, why might that be?
See here: http://polarbearscience.com/2014/02/03/polar-bear-specialist-group-population-status-update-officially-postponed/
Bad link above: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Mainstream-Last-First/143857365738368