Boris Asks About Gavin’s Spinning. | The Blackboard

So, just as I would criticize the choice of 1998, I would suggest that selecting 1999 to zero the data, crowing about good agreement after 1999 and claiming one gets “similar” graphs with other choices of zero years is…. well… cough, cough….

Zeroing the IPPC AR4 models using the 20 year reference period specified in the IPCC AR4 may be subjective relative to some other possible choices. But it is a far better and…. dare I say it… more “robust” choice than picking the single year that creates a graph Gavin would prefer the world to see.

Climate Skeptic: Climate Model Validation

Below is my graphical representation of how climate scientists evaluate their models in light of new data...

Heliogenic Climate Change: The canon of bad things and good things

One of the canons in the AGW catechism states that "global warming" (or "climate change", as the clergy now call it) always does bad things to good plants and animals (polar bears, penguins, Humboldt squid, food crops, etc.) and good things to bad plants and animals (mosquitos, the malaria protozoan parasite, corn pests, West Nile virus, etc.). The only exception to this rule is humans: humans are bad animals but "global warming" does bad things to them anyway. We all see examples of this canon every day. They are legion. Some recent ones: