Monday, October 1, 2007

"After appropriate correction, the significance of the 20th-century warming anomaly disappears"

There is a lot of scientific jargon here but let me paraphrase for you:

There once were two scientists named Osborn and Briffa who did some analysis of temperature data. Their methodology yielded output such that they noted there were higher temperatures during the 20th century.

Along came this other scientist, Gerd Bürger, who found a flaw in their methodology. He re-analyzed the data. No significant increase in temperatures in the industrialized era.

Who's correct? That's not my point here. The point is, liberal politicians and industry are leveraging the MMGW crisis, the former for more excuses to increase taxes the latter to cash in on it, and the basis for the crisis is far from established as truth.

The media on this? (crickets chirping) Crisis sells baby!

Al Gore? C'mon...are you serious? He's too busy to bother with science! He's planning rock concerts, hauling his big ass around in his private jet, enjoying his newly rejuvenated celebrity and showing his "slide show". His approach is to keep showing us that the earth is warming (which it apparently isn't) but fails "conveniently" to prove we have anything to do with it.

Even George Bush has jumped on the bandwagon (or is at least straddling it), further alienating his conservative base.

In 2006, an article appeared in Science magazine reconstructing the temperature of the Northern Hemisphere back to 800 AD...(the article) proclaimed at the time that “the 20th century is the most anomalous interval in the entire analysis period, with highly significant occurrences of positive anomalies and positive extremes in the proxy records.”

A recent issue of Science contains an article not likely to receive any press coverage at all. Gerd Bürger of Berlin’s Institut für Meteorologie decided to revisit the work of Osborn and Briffa, and his results raise serious questions about the claim that the 20th century has been unusually warm. Bürger argues that Osborn and Briffa did not apply the appropriate statistical tests that link the proxy records to observational data, and as such, Osborn and Briffa did not properly quantify the statistical uncertainties in their analyses. Bürger repeated all analyses with the appropriate adjustments and concluded “As a result, the ‘highly significant’ occurrences of positive anomalies during the 20th century disappear.” Further, he reports that “The 95th percentile is exceeded mostly in the early 20th century, but also about the year 1000.” Needless to say, Gerd Bürger is not going to win any awards from the champions of global warming – nothing is more sacred than 20th century warming!

HT World Climate Report


Bike Bubba said...

You'd be surprised how much "science" ignores the basic requirement of a statistical test. An example from here in Minnesota; a "abstinence education doesn't work" study that not only neglected to have a control, but also neglected to perform any statistical test on the data--and then came to the conclusion that there was no difference.

In other words, they said "A=B" without either measuring A or testing the proposition "A< B" statistically.


Kermit said...

You Global Warming denier! You want us to all die a horrible death drowning in dead melted glaciers with dead penguins and dead polar bears floating all around us and sharks swimming down Main Street and AAAAaaarrrgghhhhh....