NALOPKT
Apparently some CNN hack has written an article about deniers in
Oklahoma. It is a long, rambling piece, with the usual cliches about
creationism, 97%, settled science, droughts, blah, blah.
Paul Matthews has a good summary here.
But he alerts me to one particular section where the ubiquitous
Katharine Hayhoe crops up with some astonishingly dishonest comments.
Seasoned Hayhoe watchers will no doubt be aware of her regular attempts
to mislead by, for instance, ignoring climate history from the
inconvenient past. Nevertheless, she really hits new lows this time: .................
For Hayhoe to claim that sceptics commonly misuse error filled
satellite data to disprove global warming is dishonest bunkum unworthy
of a proper scientist. Even NOAA, who organised this paper, with Tom
Karl the Chief Editor, admitted back in 2006 that the earlier errors no
longer existed and that the new datasets showed no discrepancies.
Nobody is arguing that satellite data is perfect, and we know that
surface data certainly is not. But the increasing divergence of
satellite and surface temperatures in recent years is a serious and
embarrassing issue for the climate establishment. For Hayhoe to attempt
to try to hide this by building strawmen is an abuse of her position,
and shows that she can no longer be regarded as a serious scientist."
No comments:
Post a Comment