Monday, September 17, 2007

Wrong again about global warming

When we last checked in with Steve McIntyre, he had used trivial adjustments in Nasa's US temperature record to kick off a storm of global warming denialism, with such genius figures as Neal Boortz and Rush Limbaugh taking the lead.

Boortz and Limbaugh have another favored bit of denialism that they like to cite from McIntyre and fellow warming skeptic Anthony Watts - that temperature records are unreliable because numerous temperature stations are placed in locations where the temperature is artificially raised by urban heat effects. Watts runs the website that photographs such locations.

You'll be surprised to know that once again they've managed to use specious reasoning to invent a reason to not believe in global warming.

But here's the fun part. Via Tim Lambert, we see that McIntyre and Watts have been graphing the temperature data of the "good" surface stations they've identified versus the "bad" ones.

The results are picured left: the red line represents the "good" data and the light green line the "bad" data. As you can see, the trends are virtually identical, which should come as no surprise given that it had already been demonstrated that the two stations pictured on's front page as examples of good and bad stations yield virtually identical warming trends.


Anonymous said...

Global warming controversy take new picture when a writer say that temperature increase is actually a good thing as in the past sudden cool periods have killed twice as many people as warm spells. He accepted global warming issues is big but he said not our fault.

Hume's Ghost said...

A few posts down from this one is a response to Singer and Avery.