As we noted on the blog on Thursday, a new study designed to address critiques of climate science by skeptics has confirmed that “global warming is real” and the world’s average land temperature has risen by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit since the mid-1950s. The findings, released by a group of scientists and statisticians at the University of California known as the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, were welcomed by climate scientists and advocates of climate policy action, who had been hoping that skeptics would finally have to cry uncle. Not so fast.
At least one of those skeptics, Anthony Watts, had written in March on his climate-themed blog, Watts Up With That, “I’m prepared to accept whatever result they produce, even if it proves my premise wrong.” But neither Mr. Watts nor other longtime critics of climate science reached by The Times seemed satisfied with the report.
Mr. Watts, a former television meteorologist, contended that the study’s methodology was flawed because it examined data over a 60-year period instead of the 30-year-one that was the basis for his research and some other peer-reviewed studies. He also noted that the report had not yet been peer-reviewed and cited spelling errors as proof of sloppiness. He said he was not backing away from the pledge he made but that he wanted corrections made first. “I’m still happy to accept the results, whatever they might be,” Mr. Watts said. ”All I’m asking for is an apples-to-apples comparison of data.”
Similarly, Steven Mosher, a co-author of “Climategate: The Crutape letters,” a book critical of climate scientists, was not inclined to give his seal of approval, saying that the study still lacked transparency. “I’m not happy until the code is released and released in a language that people can use freely,” he said.
EDIT
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/21/climate-study-does-not-placate-skeptics/
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
