Fancy that

LA Times: Critics’ review unexpectedly supports scientific consensus on global warming

A team of UC Berkeley physicists and statisticians that set out to challenge the scientific consensus on global warming is finding that its data-crunching effort is producing results nearly identical to those underlying the prevailing view.

The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project was launched by physics professor Richard Muller, a longtime critic of government-led climate studies, to address what he called “the legitimate concerns” of skeptics who believe that global warming is exaggerated.

But Muller unexpectedly told a congressional hearing last week that the work of the three principal groups that have analyzed the temperature trends underlying climate science is “excellent…. We see a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups.”

More from The Economist

Without having yet bothered to check, Babbage can say with some certainty that this event will be much discussed in the blogosphere—as, oddly enough, it should be.

Here’s the short version of the reason why: a new and methodologically interesting study, carried out by people some of whom might have been expected to take a somewhat sceptical view on the issue, seems essentially to have confirmed the results of earlier work on the rate at which the earth’s temperature is rising. This makes suggestions that this rise is an artefact of bad measurement, or indeed a conspiracy of climatologists, even less credible than they were before.

Now here’s the much longer version…

Apparently various GOP luminaries are highly put out.

Categories: culture wars, environment, Science, skepticism

Tags: ,

2 replies

  1. “carried out by people some of whom might have been expected to take a somewhat sceptical view on the issue”
    Nothing wrong with scepticism, it is really the basis for science itself. The question is whether the new evidence satisfies these sceptics or they continue to take an opposing line – this is when the ‘denier’ moniker becomes appropriate.

  2. I get mighty ticked off at climate change “skeptics”. They should come here in the height of summer. We got their global f***ing warming right here. I practically cried with joy when it rained here all day the other day. I was like, “HOMG! RAIN! WATER! FROM THE SKY!”
    I know, I’m not talking much science, but when your garden plants are dying, because you’re worried about using good water on plants and not saving it for things like drinking, when the other side of the country you’re on is being constantly flooded and battered by ridiculously huge storms, and when you have friends in the US under metres and metres of snow, being a climate change denier (I like that term better, thank you, MichaelZ) seems like raging, ignorant foolishness.
    Hopefully this outcome will help the leaders of the world pull their thumbs out of their arses. (Am I allowed to say that on here? :-P)

%d bloggers like this: