Broke Flannery just can’t resist another bet February 20, 2010Posted by BlueGreen in Deception, Doesnt Understand, Misrepresentation, Smear.
Bolt’s Post 20 February, 2010
Bolt has another go at Flannery claiming that:
Iconic Australian beaches such as Bondi in Sydney and Bells Beach in Victoria are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, environmental scientist Tim Flannery says…
“It’s hardly surprising that beaches are going to disappear with climate change,” he told reporters outside the National Climate Change Forum in Adelaide.
Bolt at least doesn’t try to refute the claim based on current or past cherry-picked information as he has done previously. Which is not to say that he won’t do so in the future of course…
But Bolt posts a series of updates that require scrutinising.
Meanwhile, a real climate expert – Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of atmospheric sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology – says climate models of the kind that Flannery and other alarmists rely on are just not working:
…at this point, the models seem to be failing.
Wow, what a definitive proof from the expert. “Seem to be failing”. Bolt turns this into “just not working”.
Are they failing? No. From Skeptical Science:
While there are uncertainties with climate models, they successfully reproduce the past and have made predictions that have been subsequently confirmed by observations.
Then, via Watts, via Steve Goddard, Bolt claims:
Bolt reproduces Goddard’s plot of data from Rutgers University Global Snow Lab purportedly attempting to show that “winter” snowfall over the northern hemisphere has significantly increased.
But look: Tamino has clearly demonstrated that:
Goddard purposely truncated the snowfall data before 1988 back to1967 (ignoring 21 years of data) and used only January & February (claiming this represents winter – what happened to December?) data, to produce a classic cherry-picked trend. Use the whole data series, i.e. all months and all years and:
If we look at monthly snow cover anomaly for all months of the year covered by the Rutgers data we see a long-term decline of 37,000 km^2/year, which is statistically significant.
But what happens when data from all years for just the winter months are used:
If we fit a line to all the winter-season data, we get a t-value of 0.211 — nowhere near significant.
I think Bolt needs to get himself some better sources.