“He’s taken an incorrect model, he’s tweaked it to match observations, but the conclusions you get from that are not correct,” Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, said of Spencer’s new study.
Dessler prefers Hansen’s model, which doesn’t match observations.
let’s see…..
Dresser, a teacher……
or Dr. Roy Spencer, who runs the show
My money’s on Dr. Roy…………..
Any model which gets the right answer is clearly wrong. Wrong models are correct, because of aerosols – which weren’t modeled properly.
Understand now?
What’s that old expression about clear as mud…………………
“But mainstream climate scientists dismissed the research as unrealistic and politically motivated.”
Funny they described their own research when commenting on Spencer’s work.
Its an Aggie Climatologist joke!
There’s more money and no persecution with James’ model. And you might even get to sit at a table in front of politicians that will hang on your every word like it’s Jesus talking if you prefer Hansen’s model.
Omigod.. I nearly spewed my coffee all over my screen..
Here’s Hansen, Mann et al tweaking observations to match models, and Dessler is complaining about tweaking models to match observations.
Absolutely hilarious.
Just posted this comment at Livescience – reproduced here in case it’s moderated away…
=======
Sometimes I do despair..it all looks like a theater where everybody feels they need to play their usual, tired characters…
>>>Noaa _cloud_ researcher; “it is not newsworthy”
– Once upon a time we were told only peer-reviewed research was important. Now there is a peer-reviewed paper with a brand new tack on clouds&climate. If that is not newsworthy then what is?
>>>Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at texas a&m university: “he’s taken an incorrect model, he’s tweaked it to match observations, but the conclusions you get from that are not correct”
– Talk about having an a priori, unchangeable opinion…
>>>Dessler, the A&M climatologist said that he doubted the research would shift the political debate around global warming.
– Do clouds care about what a climatologist has to say about the political debate around global warming? Is this ‘Livescience’ or ‘Livepolitics’?
>>>Gavin Schmidt, a NASA goddard climatologist: “Climate sensitivity is not constrained by the last two decades of imperfect satellite data, but rather the paleoclimate record.”
– Lord Oxburgh of Oxburgh Climategate Review fame told the UK parliament that “it probably would have been true” to say that “it was actually impossible to reconstruct temperatures over the last thousand years”
>>>Kevin Trenberth: “I cannot believe it got published,”
– Of course he cannot. Trenberth is in the scientific dissent suppression business.
Journalist:
>>>Scientists have shown that as the planet warms water vapor, and thus clouds, will increase, trapping even more heat
– Have shown? Talk about prejudice…shouldn’t reporting remain separate from a journalist’s opinion?
>>>The study, published july 26 in the open-access online journal remote sensing, got public attention when a writer for the heartland institute
>>>the paper was mostly unnoticed in the public sphere until the forbes blogger declared it “extremely important.
– It’s just two days!! And the paper was mostly unnoticed because Livescience fails at his mission “to satisfy curious readers” and never reports on papers that don’t agree with mainstream climate science.
>>>University of Alabama, Huntsville researcher Roy Spencer, is a climate change skeptic and controversial figure within the climate research community
>>>No climate scientist contacted by livescience agreed.
– Spencer is a climate scientist himself. Was that too difficult to report?
the comment has disappeared. Liescience, perhaps?
Name change that to Zombiescience, but Liescience works as well. What little you show reveals the writings at that site reek of putrification as does the current ranting of most of the “Experts” they quoted!
If you take your degree from Texas A&M and put it on the dashboard of your car, you can park in handicapped parking spots.
Please don’t confuse Aggie Jokes with Dessler. Aggie jokes are funny and good-spirited. Dessler is a discredit to TAMU and is hurting the reputation of a very proud and honorable institution!
Former Aggie (sort of).
Sorry, I am an Owl. Can’t help it.
A real Aggie would know there is no such thing as a “former Aggie.”
That idiot Dessler was on Houston PBS the other night spewing his garbage. And the host said it would be difficult to find a scientist that would disagree that man hasn’t changed the climate (paraphrasing). It was pretty funny watching Dressler bring up same old BS data.