Monday, October 31, 2011

Curry talks to Muller, and I have a followup question: Should we spend $45 trillion based on data that shows "an oscillation that makes determining a trend rather ambiguous"?

Discussion with Rich Muller | Climate Etc.
the reason for the publicity blitz seems to be to get the attention of the IPCC. To be considered in the AR5, papers need to be submitted by Nov, which explains the timing. The publicity is so that the IPCC can’t ignore BEST. Muller shares my concerns about the IPCC process, and gatekeeping in the peer review process.

Re the recent trend, Muller reiterated that you can’t infer anything about what is going on globally from the land data, but the land data shows a continued increase albeit with an oscillation that makes determining a trend rather ambiguous. He thinks there is a pause, that is probably associated with AMO/PDO. So I am ok with this interpretation.
We also discussed problems with the IPCC, Climategate issues, etc., and we tend to mostly agree on all this.

No comments: