Guardian Says Berkeley Knows The Truth

They are completely unbiased and open minded, though they have already determined (ahead of their neutral study) that global warming is the most serious problem in the world.

Muller is fed up with the politicised row that all too often engulfs climate science. By laying all its data and workings out in the open, where they can be checked and challenged by anyone, the Berkeley team hopes to achieve something remarkable: a broader consensus on global warming. In no other field would Muller’s dream seem so ambitious, or perhaps, so naive.

“We are bringing the spirit of science back to a subject that has become too argumentative and too contentious,” Muller says, over a cup of tea. “We are an independent, non-political, non-partisan group. We will gather the data, do the analysis, present the results and make all of it available. There will be no spin, whatever we find.” Why does Muller feel compelled to shake up the world of climate change? “We are doing this because it is the most important project in the world today. Nothing else comes close,” he says.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Guardian Says Berkeley Knows The Truth

  1. Sparks says:

    “If the only thing we do is allow a consensus to be reached as to what is going on with global warming, a true consensus, not one based on politics, then it will be an enormously valuable achievement.”

    Classic!! I wouldn’t hold my breath!

    • The authors have obviously already made up their mind. Confirmation bias will lead them to the truth.

      • suyts says:

        I was going to include that thought……….they go overboard trying to prove themselves right. No one in the alarmist camp tries to prove themselves wrong……………for a layman, I used to think science consisted of eliminating all other possibilities………guess that was just smoke and hyperbole…….cause it sure doesn’t happen now.

      • Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

        But why do we need a definitive answer. If everyone keeps agreeing the earth is flat does it mean it’s flat?

      • suyts says:

        Scarlet,
        Apparently to those that wish it to, it does. Consensus seems to = truth to these pinheads. They can’t fathom being wrong, so why try to see if they could be wrong? That old scientific method is sooo 2oth century…….

        The thing that gets me, is the ones that try to appear level headed. They’re not. I’ve more respect for people like dogzilla(whatever) or ianish(whatever) than I do the people that have the ability to, but refuse to look at reality. At least D&I can truly believe what they spew, they lack the intellect that demands explanation. The ones that posses the intellect, and don’t offer the explanation………… it speaks volumes to their character. They know they can’t offer an explanation, but would purport their supposition as truth. In my mind, there is no more of a vile creature than one that would do as such.

  2. suyts says:

    Berkeley……..yeh, I’ve much faith they even understand the concept of truth. I’m breathlessly awaiting.

  3. Justa Joe says:

    Hold on… Didn’t the CRU destroy a bunch of important data? Well I’m pretty sure that our intrepid climatologists won’t let that impede them from determining that there is significant global warming, it’s all caused by humans, it’s unisersally catastrophic, it requires immediate action, and it can only be stopped by hitherto unheard of controls on everything that moves and doesn’t move by them and their political pals.

    They’re going to work it all out. Don’t worry.

  4. Baa Humbug says:

    Yet another meaningless “average temperature of the world”?
    So if this new mob says Ts have gone up since the Little Ice Age, we’ll know it was definately caused by man, because…because…because we can’t think what else may have caused it. Yeah sure, I’ll buy that.

    • suyts says:

      That’s so passe……. why try to prove yourself wrong when others will do it for you? Even though when they do, you can claim they don’t meet the criteria of being able to prove you wrong, even though they do, still it doesn’t count………… I dunno, we’ll see what they say…. Berkeley?? wtf?

  5. the Berkeley team hopes to achieve something remarkable: a broader consensus on global warming

    He thinks opening the whole issue up is going to gain some scientists? They really are crazy in Berkeley.

    But I think I know what they are going to open to the public. It will be the usual that we’ve been told all along: the IPCC says this and that, scientists all over the world agree, the peer reviewed literature says this and that.

    But here’s what they won’t be opening up: ClimateGate shows us that big names in global warming circles deleted raw data, spliced graphs together, agreed together to resist Freedom of Information requests, plotted to intimidate “skeptic” scientists. No, there will be no opacity on that.

  6. omnologos says:

    don’t be too cynical …Muller came out immediately against “hide the decline”. And you need a Saul to bring the Gospel outside (ie only an insider with plenty of previous publications and good warmist credentials will be able to effect change)

    • Paul in Sweden says:

      M, It is my understanding that the main worker bee in the Berkley project developed scripts to scour databases with the hope of compiling the most complete archive of temperature data(will precipitation and other weather data also be archived?). This would be a good concept if RAW data was to be gathered in an open source database with station history and quality notes & absent the controversy of value-added homogenization adjustments(a truly monumental & manual paper & data entry intensive task).

      Correct me if I am wrong. It is my understanding that extensive public online databases that Muller claims his “script guy” to be trawling do not exist in pristine RAW station reporting format. Some may exist but what happens to trends when homogenized data and raw data are mixed by “the guy that writes the scripts” for Muller’s Berkley Team?

      The various temperature databases produced by the USA and those produced now under the auspices of the UK’s MetOffice cannot pass audit & cannot be utilized for long term govt. policy(or even the basis for seasonal climate models for the municipal purchases of sand & salt). Heck, NIWA backed off of SS7 & SS11 and stated that there is no official New Zealand temperature record.

      Muller’s statements against gridded data is a real big plus in my book. Our climate is not a nice and neat matrix but odd swaths of hills, valleys, coastlines, etc…

      What I would like to see is a mundane OpenSource database of all reporting stations with history and local siting data. This way at a later date the various reporting stations can be grouped into contiguous logical climate regions & within those logical regions stations can be assessed for quality, combined and then and only then can we begin to see true trends or patterns.

      The average temp of the earth like the average telephone number in the Manhattan Yellow pages is pretty much meaningless to me. Maurizio, yes Muller should be cut some slack but if his project is not going to utilize RAW data and move to a regional climate reporting model I see this as if claims are to be taken at face value — an independent, non-political, non-partisan group that will now utilize scripts written by the ONE guy on Muller’s team to take in the same homogenized garbage data in greater quantities than has ever been archived in the past to produce a consensus report which is garbage. This is GIGO on a mega-scale.

      • Mike Davis says:

        Satellite lower troposphere trends over a period of a few centuries will probably result in some awareness of “Climate” trends on a global scale. As it is we can not even get regional trends within 2C with the current state of devices and methods for surface records!
        GIGO Rules Climatology!

  7. omnologos says:

    don’t be too cynical …Muller came out immediately against “hide the decline”. And you need a Saul to bring the Gospel outside (ie only an insider with plenty of previous publications and good w armist credentials will be able to effect change)

    • suyts says:

      I agree, a “Saul” would be just what is necessary. But, we can’t help but be a bit cynical…… we’ve seen too many of their tricks not to be wary.

  8. Airframe Eng says:

    I’m expecting the usual scam. But there are some bright spots in this ……exercise.

    1. A few of the participants are not absolutely FLAMING warmists.
    2. They supposedly will share all source data and algorithms.
    3. They have a tentative endorsement from Chiefio and D’Aleo.

    We will see. I can’t imagine a legitimate attempt would yield anything like what we see from NOAA/GISS.

  9. Mike Davis says:

    WHAT are they using to “Create” their Wondrous, Magnificient BEST WAG regarding “Global” historical temperatures. The only thing that can be said for certain is that temperatures CHANGE. The can give us a Whole Number estimate of land surface temperatures for the Northern Hemisphere and some locations in the Southern Hemisphere. Global? NFW! A few hours of reading about Sea Surface Temperature measurements through history should be all that is needed to remove them from the equation, yet some continue to discuss historical SSTs as if they had some degree of confidence in what they are talking about.
    We know that in one location in the Pacific Ocean, NINO 3/4 the temperature can vary by 4C or more over one year and that is in the middle of the friggin ocean.

    Any results claimed by the BEST team will go down in my book as SWAG!

  10. Jeff K says:

    Berkeley? Really? Reminds me of a study the neighborhood foxes wanted to conduct involving the slow decline of the chickens lately, they were just asking for access to the data, er, I mean chickens.

    • Mike Davis says:

      I always allow the “Foxes” access to the chicken coop to accurately count the chickens! It has been determined the loss of chickens is due to Global Warming. I tend to be a bit sceptical of the results because when the foxes do not stop by to take “Count” the chicken population remains the same!
      Thanks for bringing that up Jeff!

  11. Ryan Maue says:

    “Waking across the Berkeley campus, Muller stops outside Sproul Hall, where he was arrested more than 40 years ago.”

    WTF

  12. Paul in Sweden says:

    Alternatively:
    A team of academics have come together in Oxford to put in place a historic database that will combine the various events & volumes of learning documented in the numerous archives that reside in the Vatican, the Great Cathedrals & Monasteries of the Catholic faith, the Institutes of Learning Established by the world’s Anglicans, the Great centers of Islam.

    By laying all its data and workings out in the open, where they can be checked and challenged by anyone, the Berkeley Oxford team hopes to achieve something remarkable: a broader consensus on global warming monotheistic religion.

    • Mike Davis says:

      Nice! The events would be interchangeable and the results should be equal in both cases! They would both be an exercise in What If WAGing about what we are seeing from GCMs is all their various configurations! GIGO the end results can not be better than the worst data used for the exercise even if it fits the Agenda!

  13. kramer says:

    I don’t trust that this group is unbiased given that they are located in a area that I would say has roughly the same politics as Moscow.

  14. Pete says:

    I think every climate scientist would say that the world has been getting warmer over the past century. The alarmists say that the warming is due to greenhouse gasses. The deniers say that the warming is natural and CO2 has had little to do with the warming. It looks like this study is only going to agree with everyone that the world has been getting hotter and it will not touch the reason why the world has been getting hotter. What is the purpose of doing this study anyway?

  15. Pingback: Repost From March 1 | Real Science

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s