The Global Warming Challenge

Evidence-based forecasting for climate change

longines,tissot,fake rolex for sale,rolex day date,zenith,rolex datejust,cartier,omega,replica watches,u boat,rolex milgauss,patek philippe,rolex masterpiece,montblanc,rolex replica,a lange sohne,panerai,tag heuer

Archive for the ‘public policy’ Category

“DataGate” – The official temperature series from Hadley audited

without comments

From time to time we explain on this site why we use the fully disclosed and audited University of Alabama satellite reading derived lower troposphere temperature series for adjudicating the progress of The Climate Bet. And now the temperature data that are relied upon by the IPCC and policy makers around the world have been audited.

“Thanks to Dr John McLean, we see how The IPCC demands for cash rest on freak data, empty fields, Fahrenheit temps recorded as Celsius, mistakes in longitude and latitude, brutal adjustments and even spelling errors…

There are cases of tropical islands recording a monthly average of zero degrees — this is the mean of the daily highs and lows for the month. A spot in Romania spent one whole month averaging minus 45 degrees. One site in Colombia recorded three months of over 80 degrees C.”

For more on Dr McLean’s report documenting the unreliability of the Hadley Centre’s data, see Jo Nova’s blog entry, here.

Written by admin

October 11th, 2018 at 10:47 am

Science, and forecasting climate

without comments

Scott Armstrong presented a paper at the International Symposium on Forecasting in Boulder, CO, on 19 June titled “Do Forecasters of Dangerous Manmade Global Warming Follow the Science?”. A pdf copy of the slides is available from ResearchGate, here.

Written by admin

July 5th, 2018 at 12:50 pm

Are we living on a dangerously warming planet?

without comments

The news keeps coming in from the New York Times and other media that there is no longer any doubt that the Earth is getting dangerous warmer. If you believe that to be true, there is nothing that we can say to change your opinion. Only you can do that. And to do so, you first need to address this question: “Could I imagine anything that could possibly change my mind?”

If so, you might be interested in the short article on WUWT titled “Is the Earth becoming dangerously warmer?“. It might provide the information you are seeking.

February 2018 temperatures same as 11 years ago

without comments

The UAH global temperature anomaly for February 2018 was 0.20°C, which is little different from the February 2007 figure of 0.19°C, and lower than January and March 2007 figure of 0.43°C and 0.26°C. The updated chart for the extended (20 year) Climate Bet is at right. Click on the thumbnail chart for a larger image.

Some critics of our recent analysis of the Climate Bet at 10 years argued that  Read the rest of this entry »

Written by admin

March 12th, 2018 at 3:44 pm

Tipping point 10 years on: Who won the Armstrong-Gore “bet” on the climate?

without comments

The Challenge

In 2007, University of Pennsylvania Professor J. Scott Armstrong challenged former U.S. Vice President Albert Gore to a bet on what would happen to global average temperatures over the next 10 years. Professor Armstrong’s challenge was in response to Mr. Gore’s warning of a looming dangerous “tipping point” in temperatures. But when even scientists who are expert in a field make predictions about complex situation without using scientific forecasting methods, their forecasts have no value. The proposed $10,000 bet, then, was intended to draw attention to the need to assess the predictive validity of climate forecasts in an objective manner. Read the rest of this entry »

July 2017: Another unremarkable month for the global average temperature

without comments

The  global mean temperature anomaly for the month of July 2017, as estimated by the UAH  climate scientists, was 0.29°C. If it weren’t for the cries of alarm about what Mr Gore and others speculate might happen, there would be little interest in this obscure and unremarkable measurement.

Mr Gore and the IPCC did raise the alarm, however, so here on theclimatebet.com site we will continue to monitor the performance of Mr Gore and the IPCC’s 3°C per century of warming projection relative to Professor Armstrong’s bet on scientific forecasting forecasting and the Green, Armstrong, and Soon (2009) no-change model. With only 5 months of the ten-year notional bet left to run, the cumulative absolute error of the Gore/IPCC projection is 21% larger than the error of the scientific forecast.

On “Alarming Climate: Expert opinions and government funding versus scientific forecasting”

without comments

Kesten Green, Scott Armstrong, and Willie Soon responded to MIT President Reif’s apparently unshaken belief in dangerous manmade global warming in a letter published by WUWT on July 20. The letter starts as follows:

On June 17, we and our co-authors received a response to our letter to MIT President, Professor Reif, raising concerns about his letter to the MIT community in support of the Paris Climate Accord. Professor Reif’s response stated that he was confident in his position on the issue because it is consistent with the beliefs of experts that implementation of the Paris Accord is necessary to save the world from harmful effects of man-made global warming. We are not reassured.

The read the full letter, published on WUWT under the headline “Alarums And Excursions”, here.

Lindzen on climate alarmism

without comments

MIT professor of atmospheric science Richard Lindzen wrote in his April 25 “Thoughts on the public discourse over climate change”:

Although I have presented evidence as to why the issue is not a catastrophe and may likely be beneficial, the response is puzzlement. I am typically asked how this is possible. After all, 97% of scientists agree, several of the hottest years on record have occurred during the past 18 years, all sorts of extremes have become more common, polar bears are disappearing, as is arctic ice, etc. In brief, there is overwhelming evidence of warming, etc. I tended to be surprised that anyone could get away with such sophistry or even downright dishonesty, but it is, unfortunately, the case that this was not evident to many of my listeners. I will try in this brief article to explain why such claims are, in fact, evidence of the dishonesty of the alarmist position.

To read the rest of his op-ed, see here.

Armstrong interview on Earth Day: “Give us your money and we will save you…”

without comments

“A lot of these people that were marching weren’t familiar with the first Earth Day in 1970. The first Earth Day said, ‘The science is settled: the Earth is getting colder.’ And the government said, ‘Give us your money, and we’ll save you,’” Armstrong told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow.

“The earth did not get colder. In fact, it got a bit warmer,” he noted. “So money was wasted, people forgot. But then last Saturday, we’re told once again that this time it’s really settled, and it’s getting warmer this time. So give us your money, and we’ll save you.”

More…

Written by admin

April 25th, 2017 at 9:49 am

Regulate the climate?: A new resource on the effects of regs

without comments

Advocates of the dangerous manmade global warming hypothesis call for regulations in response to their alarm. Assume for a moment that the alarmists’ feverish scenarios really were going to come to pass… would regulations make the situation better?

The Iron Law of Regulation suggests otherwise. For a new site from Kesten Green and Scott Armstrong that is devoted to experimental evidence on the effects of regulations, see IronLawofRegulation.com.

Written by admin

June 20th, 2016 at 7:34 pm