Comment
Comment
re: #470 freetoken
There’s a link to Pielke Jr. in the spin-offs, that should get you started. Otherwise, try here:
[Link: www.msnbc.msn.com…]
Good luck
I read Pielke Jr’s blog entry on this… the last three very interesting paragraphs in his comment state…
Second, it took the released CRU emails to open up a public scientific dialogue on this subject, which suggests that there are some issues with either model projections or observations. Judging from the Pielke-Trenberth-Willis exchange, I’d put my money on problems with the models.
Third, none of this should alter how we think about the policy issues, as uncertainties have always been with us and always will. But getting uncertainties out in the open is a new thing for the public face of climate science and undoubtedly some will likely try to reassert the old ways of suppressing uncertainties.
The story of the missing heat does not indicate that climate science is a fraud or that we need not worry about a human influence on the climate system. What it does tell us is that there have been some unhealthy goings on in the climate community and we should all bask in the new found sunshine.
So where is the missing heat? Apparently no one knows, but I hope they find it soon.
I’m not sure what this all means? I understand the part about “does not indicate that climate science is a fraud or that we need not worry about a human influence on the climate system…” but I thought there was nothing wrong with the process, procedures and policies of the major climate science centers… evidently this scientist thinks that it warrants interest… ” What it does tell us is that there have been some unhealthy goings on in the climate community…”
Again, am I missing something? Isn’t Pielke Jr, Trenberth and Fasullo peer-reviewed and respected scientist… or should I ignore someone in this trinity?
