{"id":31457,"date":"2017-02-06T22:12:34","date_gmt":"2017-02-06T21:12:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ocasapiens-dweb.blogautore.repubblica.it\/?p=31457"},"modified":"2017-02-06T22:12:34","modified_gmt":"2017-02-06T21:12:34","slug":"riflessi-pronti-cont","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/2017\/02\/06\/riflessi-pronti-cont\/","title":{"rendered":"Riflessi pronti, cont."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>La Rapid Response Team non ha ancora finito di smentire i &#8220;fatti alternativi&#8221; di David Rose e di John Bates sul clima e sul lavoro di Thomas Karl, scienziati della NOAA e di altri centri di ricerca, che avrebbero truccato i dati delle temperature. A questo ritmo ci vorrebbe una squadra solo per farne una rassegna.<br \/>\nTra quello che sono riuscita a leggere, ho trovato interessante l&#8217;articolo di <a href=\"https:\/\/insideclimatenews.org\/news\/16012017\/climate-change-noaa-donald-trump-lamar-smith-global-warming-hiatus\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Inside Climate News <\/a>sul contesto dello &#8220;scoop&#8221;. Alla rassegna stampa che facevo ieri, <a href=\"http:\/\/climatenexus.org\/messaging-communication\/current-events\/climate-change-science-noaa-falsely-maligned-tabloid-spin\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Climate Nexus<\/a> ha aggiunto<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Ten climate envoys and ministers involved with the Paris Agreement\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.climatechangenews.com\/2017\/02\/06\/contested-noaa-paper-had-no-influence-on-paris-climate-deal\/\">said there was no truth<\/a>\u00a0[link al pezzo di Ed King, su Clim. Change News]\u00a0to Rose\u2019s claim that this study influenced their decisions. &#8230; \u00a0[A proposito di contesto:]\u00a0Worth noting that Lamar Smith is scheduled to hold a hearing on \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/science.house.gov\/legislation\/hearings\/full-committee-hearing-making-epa-great-again\">Making EPA Great Again<\/a>\u201d this week.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>e le smentite<br \/>\n&#8211; del redattore di<em> Science<\/em> che ne ha deciso la pubblicazione<br \/>\n&#8211; del contrammiraglio Tierney, ex &#8220;Chief Operative Officer&#8221; della NOAA<br \/>\n&#8211; di Jane Lubcenko, ex amministratrice della NOAA<br \/>\n&#8211; di James Hansen, ex direttore del centro NASA-GISS<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">*<\/p>\n<p>Il miliardario (perch\u00e9 lo stato britannico ne ha comprato la banca &#8211; ereditata dal padre &#8211; dopo che l&#8217;aveva fatta fallire)\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.desmogblog.com\/matt-ridley\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Matt Ridley<\/a> ha scritto ieri sul <em>Times<\/em> di Londra che il direttore di <em>Science<\/em>\u00a0pensava di ritrattare il paper &#8211;\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/RozPidcock\/status\/828611257771184128\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">mentiva<\/a> come al solito.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">*<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/arstechnica.com\/science\/2017\/02\/article-names-whistleblower-who-told-congress-that-noaa-manipulated-data\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Scott Johnson<\/a> di <em>Ars Technica<\/em> ha parlato anche con<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px\">Thomas Peterson, a co-author on the Karl paper who has since retired. Peterson provided some useful context for understanding Bates\u2019 allegations. [&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>Johnson ha scoperto vecchie ruggini:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px\">There may also be something beyond simple \u201cengineers vs. scientists\u201d tension behind Bates\u2019 decision to go public with his allegations. Two former NOAA staffers confirmed to <em>Ars<\/em> that Tom Karl\u00a0essentially demoted John Bates in 2012,\u00a0when Karl was Director of NOAA\u2019s National Centers for Environmental Information. Bates had held the title of Supervisory Meteorologist and Chief of the Remote Sensing Applications Division, but Karl removed him from that position partly due to a failure to maintain professionalism with colleagues, assigning him to a position in which he would no longer supervise other staff. It was apparently no secret that the demotion did not sit well with Bates.<\/p>\n<p>Conclude:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left;padding-left: 30px\">The article on the\u00a0<em>Daily Mail<\/em>\u00a0website is headlined \u201cExposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data,&#8221; but the list of those \u201cduped\u201d seems to be limited to the author of the story and any readers who make the mistake of trusting it. Sadly, those believers include the head of the House Science Committee.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Sul blog di Judith &#8220;che comprino condizionatori&#8221; Curry, sono <a href=\"http:\/\/archive.is\/dKdbi\">uscite<\/a> le risposte di John Bates ad alcune delle critiche degli scienziati con ampi commenti della titolare, entrambi un po&#8217; bizzarri. Per esempio Bates scrive che Peter Thorne non pu\u00f2 sapere quali erano le obiezioni sue (di Bates) perch\u00e9<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left;padding-left: 30px\">the specific concerns being discussed were raised in 2015&#8230;\u00a0I sent my formal complaint on K15 to the NCEI Science Council in Jan 2016.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Pretende da un anno che gli autori dovevano dargli retta, ma secondo il <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/RozPidcock\/status\/828611257771184128\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">direttore<\/a><\/strong> di <em>Science,<\/em>\u00a0per il paper di Karl, Thorne, Peterson et al. uscito sul numero del 26 giugno 2015, la peer review \u00e8 durata sei mesi. Il tempo per il redattore di controllare che rispetti regole della rivista e di trovare i revisori, significa che \u00e8 arrivato nel 2014.<em><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Judith Curry finisce cos\u00ec:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left;padding-left: 30px\">In other words, with the surface temperature data set we are in the realm of\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/archive.is\/o\/dKdbi\/https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Regulatory_science\">regulatory science<\/a>, which has a very different playbook from academic, \u2018normal\u2019 science. While regulatory science is most often referred to in context of food and pharmaceutical sciences, it is also relevant to environmental regulations as well. The procedures developed by John Bates are absolutely essential for certifying these datasets, as well as their uncertainties, for a regulatory environment.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Le procedure di Bates saranno anche valide per i satelliti che per\u00f2 hanno problemi ben pi\u00f9 gravi e non misurano le temperature di superficie. Quanto alle regole del gioco per i data-set delle temperature,\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.wmo.int\/pages\/prog\/wcp\/wcdmp\/GCDS_3.php\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">sono stabilite<\/a>\u00a0dalla WMO &#8211; via l&#8217;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.surfacetemperatures.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">International Surface Temperature Initiative <\/a>&#8211; dopo pubblicazione di metodi e procedure su riviste peer-reviewed, non sul <em>Fail on Sunday<\/em> o su un blog gomblottista.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">\u00a0*<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Il delizioso lagomorfo riassume lo pseudo-scandalo &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/rabett.blogspot.it\/2017\/02\/boiling-bates-down.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Boiling Bates Down<\/a>&#8221; &#8211; hilarious.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">***<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Sia <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.climalteranti.it\/2017\/02\/05\/impatti-e-vulnerabilita-dei-cambiamenti-climatici-in-europa\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Climalteranti<\/a><\/strong> che <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.realclimate.org\/index.php\/archives\/2017\/02\/new-report-climate-change-impacts-and-vulnerability-in-europe-2016\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Real Climate<\/a><\/strong> recensiscono &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.eea.europa.eu\/publications\/climate-change-impacts-and-vulnerability-2016\">Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016<\/a>&#8221;\u00a0della\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.eea.europa.eu\/\">European Environment Agency<\/a>\u00a0(EEA).<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Neven ha <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/neven1.typepad.com\/blog\/2017\/02\/piomas-february-2017.html#more\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">pubblicato <\/a><\/strong>i risultati di PIOMAS:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left;padding-left: 30px\">In short, January 2017 was pretty much disastrous for the sea ice.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: left\">Grafici aggiornati da <a href=\"http:\/\/sites.uci.edu\/zlabe\/arctic-sea-ice-extentconcentration\/\">Zachary Labe<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>La Rapid Response Team non ha ancora finito di smentire i &#8220;fatti alternativi&#8221; di David Rose e di John Bates sul clima e sul lavoro di Thomas Karl, scienziati della NOAA e di altri centri di ricerca, che avrebbero truccato i dati delle temperature. A questo ritmo ci vorrebbe una squadra solo per farne una&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/2017\/02\/06\/riflessi-pronti-cont\/\">Continua a leggere <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Riflessi pronti, cont.<\/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":[8,10,25],"tags":[1833,2990,3745,3780,5732],"class_list":["post-31457","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bufala","category-clima","category-politica","tag-david-rose","tag-ghiacci-artici","tag-john-bates","tag-judith-curry","tag-rapporto-eea","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31457","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=31457"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31457\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31457"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31457"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31457"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}