Translate

Wednesday, May 16, 2018

+Myth: Karl et al. of the NOAA Misleadingly Altered Ocean Temperature Records to Increase Global Warming

The outline for this post is as follows:
  1. The Myth and Its Flaw
  2. Context and Analysis
  3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis
  4. References

This is the "+References" version of this post, which means that this post contains my full list of references and citations. If you would like an abbreviated and easier to read version, then please go to the "main version" of this post.

References are cited as follows: "[#]", with "#" corresponding to the reference number given in the References section at the end of this post.

This blogpost's twitter thread: https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/996791100479295493





1.  The Myth and Its Flaw



The myth states that Thomas Karl and other researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) misleadingly, or fraudulently, altered sea surface temperature records in order to artificially increase the global warming trend. Karl et al. fabricated an analysis in this way in order to remove a recent "pause" or "hiatus" in global warming.

Myth: Karl et al. of the NOAA Misleadingly Altered Ocean Temperature Records to Increase Global Warming

The outline for this post is as follows:
  1. The Myth and Its Flaw
  2. Context and Analysis
  3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis
  4. References

This is the "main version" version of this post, which means that this post lacks most of my references and citations. If you would like a more comprehensive versions with all the references and citations, then please go to the "+References" version of this post.

References are cited as follows: "[#]", with "#" corresponding to the reference number given in the References section at the end of this post

This blogpost's twitter thread: https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/996791100479295493





1.  The Myth and Its Flaw



The myth states that Thomas Karl and other researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) misleadingly, or fraudulently, altered sea surface temperature records in order to artificially increase the global warming trend. Karl et al. fabricated an analysis in this way in order to remove a recent "pause" or "hiatus" in global warming.

Monday, April 30, 2018

+Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation


The outline for this post is as follows:
  1. The Myth and Its Flaw
  2. Context and Analysis (divided into multiple sections)
  3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis
  4. References

This is the "+References" version of this post, which means that this post contains my full list of references and citations. If you would like an abbreviated and easier to read version, then please go to the "main version" of this post.

References are cited as follows: "[#]", with "#" corresponding to the reference number given in the References section at the end of this post.




1.  The Myth and Its Flaw



Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels correlate with long-term temperature changes on Earth [5; 11 - 21; 447]. There is also an evidence-based [7 - 10; 34 - 74; 84; 394; 684; 887] scientific consensus [28; 31, table 1; 32, figure 2 v007 on page 11; 33, page 49; 499, page 28 in chapter 2; 500] that humans caused most of the recent global warming, predominately via increasing levels of greenhouse gases such as CO2 (just as there is an evidence-based scientific consensus on other topics [22 - 30; 309 - 312; 314; 331, page 3.8; 399; 943 - 946; 947, table 3 on page 4594]). Therefore scientists attribute most of the recent warming to man-made release of CO2. Some critics object to this causal attribution, since the critics claim the attribution involves incorrectly inferring causation from correlation [75 - 83; 85 - 87; 89 - 93; 95; 96]. The critics' claim is the myth this blogpost focuses on.

Myth: Attributing Warming to CO2 Involves the Fallaciously Inferring Causation from a Mere Correlation


The outline for this post is as follows:
  1. The Myth and Its Flaw
  2. Context and Analysis (divided into multiple sections)
  3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis
  4. References

This is the "main version" version of this post, which means that this post lacks most of my references and citations. If you would like a more comprehensive versions with all the references and citations, then please go to the "+References" version of this post.

References are cited as follows: "[#]", with "#" corresponding to the reference number given in the References section at the end of this post.




1.  The Myth and Its Flaw



Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels correlate with long-term temperature changes on Earth. There is also an evidence-based scientific consensus that humans caused most of the recent global warming, predominately via increasing levels of greenhouse gases such as CO2 (just as there is an evidence-based scientific consensus on other topics). Therefore scientists attribute most of the recent warming to man-made release of CO2. Some critics object to this causal attribution, since the critics claim the attribution involves incorrectly inferring causation from correlation. The critics' claim is the myth this blogpost focuses on.

Thursday, March 1, 2018

+Myth: Judith Curry Fully and Accurately Represents Scientific Research

The outline for this post is as follows:
  1. The Myth and Its Flaw
  2. Context and Analysis
  3. Posts Providing Further Information and Analysis
  4. References

This is the "+References" version of this post, which means that this post contains my full list of references and citations. If you would like an abbreviated and easier to read version, then please go to the "main version" version of this post.

References are cited as follows: "[#]", with "#" corresponding to the reference number given in the References section at the end of this post.




1.  The Myth and Its Flaw



Judith Curry is a prominent critic of mainstream science on anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (AGW) [1 - 4]. A number of parties champion her positions and cite her as an accurate source of climate science information [88 - 94], including the George C. Marshall Institute [91], the Global Warming Policy Foundation [90], The Daily Mail [92], The Washington Times [94], John Stossel [93], and the "lukewarmer [95]" Matt Ridley [89]. Curry's reliable representation of scientific research is the myth this blogpost addresses.