Scientific American said of physicist and climate skeptic at University of California-Berkeley: "Muller's views on climate have made him the darling of the climate skeptics." That probably explains why Professor Muller received a $150,000 grant from the Koch Brothers that partially funded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project. Other funding included support from Bill Gates' Foundation.
Muller has now released 4 scientific papers (http://berkeleyearth.org/) that confirm the scientific work done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA's Goddard Institute, and the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and Research in Britain. Muller specifically states his findings rebut the charges that the climate records have been manipulated or incorrectly presented.
Muller makes the following findings:
1. Global average land temperatures have increased 0.91 celsius degrees.
2. The rate of warming is accelerating and warmed over the last 40 years at a rate of 2.76 celsius for a century, after warming at a rate of 0.73 degrees celsius for the entire 20th century.
3. There has not been a cooling since 1998. Instead the rate of warming has accelerated to 2.84 degrees celsius from 1998 to 2010.
The science that the world is warming and the rate of warming is irrefutable. Professor Muller's BEST papers now pose a challenge to the honor of those who have funded and spread global warming junk science.
Will the global warming deniers such as Governor Perry, Senator Inhofe, George Will, and most of the conservative movement who often attack the left for adhering to junk science confess their error? Will people like Governor Perry who have smeared scientists by saying that they have manipulated temperature data to gain income apologize for their reckless, false charges?
For the rest of us, the Muller BEST data is the worst kind of good news. While it shreds the global warming deniers of all integrity, it confirms once more that substantial warming has taken place, the rate of warming is accelerating, and that our climate is changing in ways that can cause major economic and natural damages.
The earth is warming…Really? These studies are not relevant to the argument. The conservative movement questions 1) the degree to which climate change is being caused by human activity and 2) the effect of costly climate change regulations on a wide range industry as well as the huge amounts of money recklessly thrown at the cause.
ReplyDeleteRick Perry: “scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change. Yes, our climates change. They’ve been changing ever since the earth was formed.”
No one is denying climate change, we question our role in causing it and our ability to stop it!
You cannot be serious when you say, "no one is denying climate change..." Inhofe, George Will, Limbaugh, The conservative movement, the deniers have been attacking the temperature records and saying the world is not warming. Often you have smeared scientists as your end justifies the means in your mind. First it was the satellite data supposedly contradicted the land data. Then it was for a host of reasons that the land data was wrong. You have been giving forums to various speakers to make all these and more attacks on the temperature record. Prof. Muller himself was the darling of the skeptics, because he questioned whether the data confirmed that the earth was warming. Muller with Koch money confirms the scientists are right. Indeed George Will, Limbaugh many conservatives have recently been saying the earth has been cooling over the last decade. Totally wrong on all points. But I will gratefully accept as progress your agreement that the earth has already warmed nearly 2 degrees fahrenheit and that the pace of warming is accelerating. Now you are left with the position that loading the atmosphere with huge amounts of heat trapping gas and raising the concentrations of heat trapping gas by about 40% in 150 years has nothing to do with the agreed to temperature increases. By all means we should have a reasoned, factual discussion about what to do about it. We must consider the costs of action. We must also consider the costs of inaction. Because doing nothing is not a zero cost option. Furthermore doing smart things can indeed be a lower cost option than business as usual, even leaving aside the avoided costs as part of the equation.
ReplyDeleteOf course I am serious. I’ll pretend for a moment that that these three individuals represent the conservative position on climate change (I see you have now excused Rick Perry per the above quote). Emphasis on the words man made…..
ReplyDeleteLimbaugh: "Belief In Man-Made Global Warming Is A Lot Like Believing In Santa Claus"
Gerorge Will: “Skeptics about the shrill certitudes concerning catastrophic manmade warming are skeptical because climate change is constant: From millennia before the Medieval Warm Period (800 to 1300), through the Little Ice Age (1500 to 1850), and for millennia hence, climate change is always a 100 percent certainty.”
James Inhofe: “Nobody knows how much of the present warming trend might be a natural phenomenon, and, Nobody knows how much of the present trend might be man-made”
Now we can excuse Limbaugh, Gorge Will, and James Inhofe. And since I have now put fourth these individuals’ position on the issue in the correct context, my question for you is this:
Are you unwilling or unable to draw a distinction between questioning the existence of ANTHROPGENIC climate change and simply whether or not climate change exists?
I agree that it is time for a serious discussion regarding climate change and the cost benefit of a given proposal. Understanding the basic premise of someone's position or some group (conservatives) on the topic and refraining from distorting the argument would be a positive starting point.
Now about that apology...
you are cherry picking these gentleman. Will, Limbaugh, Inhofe have all engaged in basic attacks on the temperature records and have gone so far to say the world is cooling.
ReplyDeleteThe National Academy of Sciences and the overwhelming majority of real climate scientists also have stated that the cause os the warming with vary high confidences is the also clearly measured and documented increases in atmoshperic concentrations of heat trapping gas.
But I see you want to discuss the costs and benefits of a proposal. I would be glad to have a discussion about the cost benefit of a proposals. That is indeed the right conversation. It is a strange conversation for Inhofe and others who call global warming a hoax or otherwise deny it to have. But progress perhaps is being made. Wonderful if so.