The older I get the less I trust anybody. Economists, political think tanks, number crunchers, enviornmentalists; all full of it apparently, just trying to feather their own nests and further their own agenda.

A statistical analysis published on a personal Web site suggests the IPCC report that concluded "there is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones" might have small inaccuracies in other out of context statements? Stop the presses!

Just 5 questions: The temperature record

4. GISS has been accused by critics of manipulating data. Has this changed the way that it handles its temperature data?

Indeed, there are people who believe that GISS uses its own private data or somehow massages the data to get the answer we want. That's completely inaccurate. We do an analysis of the publicly available data that’s collected by other groups. All of the data is available to the public for download, as are the computer programs used to analyze it. One of the reasons the GISS numbers are used and quoted so widely by scientists is that the process is completely open to outside scrutiny.

5. What about the meteorological stations? There have been suggestions that some of the stations are located in the wrong place, are using outdated instrumentation, etc.

Global weather services gather far more data than we need. To get the structure of the monthly or yearly temperature changes over the United States, for example, you’d need just a handful of stations, but there are actually some 1,100 of them. You could throw out 50 percent of the station data or more, and you’d get basically the same answers. Individual stations do get old and break down, since they're exposed to the elements, but this is just one of things that NOAA [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] has to deal with. One recent innovation is the set up of a climate reference network alongside the current stations so that they can look for potentially serious issues on the large scale — and they haven't found any yet.

Justin, you're quoting TV weathermen as experts now? I take it Ghiorse was busy. It sounds so much more credible when you call them "climate researchers". What do those eggheads at NASA know, right?

"Hatton has thirty years of experience of getting scientific papers published, but describes this one, available on his personal website, as "unpublishable"."

That's right "unpublishable". I wonder why?

"Even the North Atlantic increase should be treated with caution, Hatton concludes, since the period contains one anomalous year of unusually high hurricane activity - 2005 - the year Al Gore used the Katrina tragedy to advance the case for the manmade global warming theory."

That quote from the linked article provides inspiration for this stirring imagery from Katz,

"For some reason, I can't shake the image of a lead climate expert having his scientist mask ripped off to reveal his true identity as Al Gore"

I think that the climate warmed a bit with the release of that line. Pew.

This article gives the light in which we can observe the reality. This is very nice one and gives in-depth information. Thanks for this nice article