Exposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n accompagnato da\u00a0un lancio pubblicitario di John Bates sul blog<\/a> negaiol-complottista di Judith “si comprino un condizionatore<\/a>” Curry.<\/p>\n The ‘whistle blower’ is John Bates who was not involved in any aspect of the work. NOAA’s process is very stove-piped such that beyond seminars there is little dissemination of information across groups. John Bates never participated in any of the numerous technical meetings on the land or marine data I have participated in at NOAA NCEI either in person or remotely. This shows in his reputed (I am taking the journalist at their word that these are directly attributable quotes) mis-representation of the processes that actually occured. In some cases these mis-representations are publically verifiable.<\/p>\n *<\/p>\n Fake data journalism<\/strong><\/p>\n L’articolo del Fail on Sunday lascia intendere che John Bates abbia confezionato\u00a0questo grafico<\/a>\u00a0come “evidenza” della falsificazione commessa dai suoi ex-colleghi:<\/p>\n Hilarious screw up by @DavidRoseUK<\/a> and #FailOnSunday<\/a> 1st picture is ‘evidence’ of misconduct, 2nd<\/a> <\/strong>shows diff[erence] when baselines are correct.<\/p>\n 0,0 \u00b0C non rappresenta “14\u00b0 C” che non \u00e8<\/a><\/strong> “la temperatura media del mondo”: nella serie NOAA rappresenta la media – 1901-2000 e nella serie HadCrut quella 1961-1990 – di riferimento per le variazioni.\u00a0(Esilarante, ma spezzerei Oggi pomeriggio<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>David Rose ha aggiunto una frase alla didascalia:<\/p>\n The red line shows the current NOAA world temperature graph – elevated in recent years due to the \u2018adjusted\u2019 sea data. The blue line is the Met Office’s independent HadCRUT4 record. Although they are offset in temperature by 0.12\u00b0C due to different analysis techniques,\u00a0they reveal that NOAA has been adjusted and so shows a steeper recent warming trend.<\/p>\n lol<\/a><\/p>\n Dr Bates shoots himself in the foot<\/strong> \u00a0there are some very large uncertainties in ocean sea surface temperatures, even in recent decades.<\/p>\n Large nel senso di 0,13 +\/- 0,05 \u00b0C<\/p>\n Efforts by the global numerical weather prediction centers to produce global reanalyses such as the\u00a0European Copernicus effort<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>is probably the best way forward for the most recent decades.<\/p>\n Link nell’originale, grazie al quale tutti possono vedere<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>che dal 2005 le anomalie NOAA sono inferiori a quelle HadCrut contrariamente a quanto asserisce pochi paragrafi prima, dopo il piagnisteo sul Washington Post<\/em> che non ha voluto comprare il suo scoop e sui colleghi che per archiviare i dati seguono le procedure internazionali invece della sua e preferiscono il proprio codice al suo. (1)<\/p>\n Per dirla con\u00a0John Abraham So Mr. Rose and the climate-change denialists will have to work a bit harder next time…. They are making misleading claims and attacking scientists with intimidating tactics. This is a playbook that has been used for years. It should alarm everyone that excellent researchers like Dr. Thomas Karl from NOAA can be attacked for just telling us what the data says.<\/p>\n Nota 1<\/strong> Non mi aspettavo<\/a> che Eric Davidson, da presidente\u00a0dell’American Geophysical Union<\/a>, prendesse “sul serio” quel Crap. Ma cribbio, guardare almeno i dati di Copernicus caldeggiati da Bates prima di cliccare “publish”, no?<\/p>\n Non sono la sola a chiedermelo. Eric Davidson ha aggiunto oggi un\u00a0“chiarimento<\/strong>“<\/a>:<\/p>\n AGU believes that the merits of the Karl et al. (2015) should be and have been discussed in appropriate peer-reviewed scientific journals. We note that the main results of that study have since been independently replicated by later work. In the meantime, we will continue to stand up for the credibility of climate science, the freedom of scientists to conduct and communicate their science.<\/p>\n Meno male.<\/p>\n The purpose of our posts on this topic \u2013 past, present, and future \u2014 are to make you aware of this development affecting climate science and scientific data management. We are closely monitoring how this will play out among policymakers and influencers. For example, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology issued a misleading<\/strong>\u00a0press release<\/a><\/strong>. These types of statements by policymakers that attempt to take one study\/dispute and blow it out of proportion are both unhelpful and misleading.<\/p>\n Se s’informa, a mio avviso scopre che il com. stampa \u00e8 stato scritto o approvato da un certo Bates,\u00a0<\/strong>ex\u00a0membro<\/a><\/strong> del consiglio d’amministrazione dell’AGU.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Smut Clyde ha aggiornato il punteggio del duo Finelli & Tarantino (19 a 25) e su Riddled canta\u00a0l’audaci imprese<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0della premiata ditta Gatti & Montanari<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Annunciato da mesi come un nuovo Climategate (per chi non c’era nel 2009: una collezione di bufale ottenute ritagliando pezzi di frasi da migliaia di mail rubate dal server della Climate Research Unit all’universit\u00e0 dell’East Anglia) grazie a “due coraggiosi whistler blowers” doveva dimostrare che gli scienziati della NOAA truccano i dati delle temperature globali.… Continua a leggere Che riflessi pronti<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,10,20],"tags":[227,519,1833,3745,3780,3874,6538,6726,6827],"class_list":["post-31450","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bufala","category-clima","category-medicina","tag-agu","tag-antonietta-gatti","tag-david-rose","tag-john-bates","tag-judith-curry","tag-lamar-smith","tag-stefano-montanari","tag-temperature-globali","tag-thomas-karl","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31450","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31450"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31450\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":44685,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31450\/revisions\/44685"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31450"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31450"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31450"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/media.giphy.com\/media\/3o7TKx9IHKtbtSo3Mk\/giphy.gif\")
\nFrottole, avevano gi\u00e0 scritto stamattina\u00a0Zeke Hausfather<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>(Berkeley Earth),\u00a0Victor Venema<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(Uni-Bonn, WMO), and Then There’s Physics<\/a><\/strong>, Jim Hunt\u00a0<\/a><\/strong>e probabilmente altri insonni.
\nPeter Thorne<\/a><\/strong> (Irish Climate Analysis), co-autore del paper “esagerato”, si concentra sui fatti alternativi inventati dal meteorologo John Bates, andato in pensione dalla NOAA due anni fa:<\/p>\n![\"The](\"http:\/\/i.dailymail.co.uk\/i\/pix\/2017\/02\/04\/23\/3CD7C57C00000578-4192182-image-a-90_1486249374130.jpg\")
\nInvece Gavin Schmidt<\/a>\u00a0lo attribuisce a Rose, noto per l’acalculia:<\/p>\nuna lancetta<\/del> un grissino per Rose: anche ai media onesti farebbe comodo se tutte le serie usassero la stessa baseline.)<\/p>\n
\nScrive:<\/p>\nCook<\/del><\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>(h\/t Riccardo – University of St. Thomas, Minnesota)\u00a0sul\u00a0Guardian<\/em>,<\/p>\n
\nIl\u00a0CRASS<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/strong>(Comittee of Republicans Against Sound Science, da non confondere con questo<\/a>) capeggiato da Lamar Smith<\/strong><\/a> \u00e8 entusiasta<\/a><\/strong> del CRAP (Conspirationist Recursive Alternative Phacts) di Bates, Curry & Rose.<\/p>\n