jump to navigation

Not unusual, not the hottest, not still warming February 14, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Deception, Misrepresentation.

Bolt’s Post 15 February, 2010

In this post, Bolt purposely misrepresents a climate scientist to make up his own climate change claims:

In response to this question:

Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?

Phil Jones responds:

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

So, shorter: The global warming from 1995 is nearly significant at the 95% confidence level.

To the question:

Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?

Jones responds:

No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant.

Andrew Bolt turns this into:

 There has been no statistically significant warming for 15 years, and even cooling since January 2002.

Jones said the cooling was definitely not significant and the warming was nearly significant, yet Bolt chooses to make that claim!

In relation to the question on the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), Jones is asked:

There is a debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was global or not. If it were to be conclusively shown that it was a global phenomenon, would you accept that this would undermine the premise that mean surface atmospheric temperatures during the latter part of the 20th Century were unprecedented?

Phil Jones says:

There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia. For it to be global in extent the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern Hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.

[In fact, there is quite strong evidence (via SkepticalScience) that the MWP was not a global phenomenon but was associated with localised or isolated warming which was offset by colder temperatures over other parts of the globe.]

Bolt uses this statement to illogically jump to a conclusion that:

So the recent rate of warming isn’t unprecedented when likened to recent warming periods that are not blamed on man.

Not only does Bolt misrepresent Jones but he then claims his own misrepresentations as facts:

And these facts, agreed to now by one of the scientists most responsible for the man-made warming theory, is behind the greatest mass panic in modern history.

%d bloggers like this: