$20 bucks say Tass America, aka the lib media, fails to consider this a worthwhile story.

Its settled science, remember??

Science is never settled. That's why it's so cool.

There will always be serious disagreements on scientific data collection and what it means. But overall, business, the consumer and evironment will all gain from a move towards more "green" products that use less energy and save consumers real money.

For all the Algore lemmings this clip comes to mind!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxULYcZlEuM

I think it is called Global warming and not US warming. If you look at the charts I link to (Fig 1 and 2) you will notice that temperatures have increase drastically over the last century and half.

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/4418_MythsvFacts_05.pdf

Another example is that our winter was cool, but the overall global reading for the winter of 06-07 was the warmest ever recorded.

I bet Algore will be all hot and bothered by this new information which is sure to cool everyone's fears that the world is overheating.
It even gives him a convenient excuse to explain why his beliefs are so full of hot air.

Dang you Kim.... just when I had the best global warming story ever. lol

The position was false before the data was corrected. It would have been false even if the data showing 1998 to be the hottest year on record. One hot year does not prove human caused global warming.

What we have is a political agenda seeking justification and that is the problem. It's not about global warming; it wasn't about global cooling; it wasn't about over-population; and it won't be about the next manufactured crisis. It is about the destruction of Western ideals.

It turns out that is completely wrong.

Not completely. 1998 and 1934 simply switched places on the list. So did the #3 and #4 years. There was more shuffling lower down, with 2001 dropping off the top 10 completely and being replaced by 1939.

The real significance here is that the program code was never reviewed by others, so this mathematical error went undetected for several years. Errors in complex mathematical formulae are among the hardest programming errors to find, precisely because there's no way to find them other than working the data with pencil and paper, which few people have the patience to do. One wonders what other undetected errors are lurking deep in the climate-change models...

Corrections are always welcome, but keep in mind that the data in question are for US temperatures, which only account for about 2% of global temperatures. 2005 is still the warmest year on record globally (according to GISS analysis).

"I think it is called Global warming and not US warming."

A good point, but three crucial items of consideration:

1. Prior to WWII, only the US, Western Europe, and a handful of other locations had reliable weather records. Others are not reliable.

2. Of the pre-WWII "Good" climate records, only the US occupies a broad climate range. Due to the sheer size of the US and the ecological variability, records in the US can be used to proxy global conditions much better than records in Europe.

3. Ergo, the US data pre-WWII is probably a better indicator of global conditions than what world wide data can be dredged up.

Ben

"the warmest ever recorded."

Recorded. Not the warmest ever, really.

My gig is that I do think animals affect the planet; however, the climate will always be changing.

The Ice Age came and went (though I don't blame Ray Ramano), twice, at least. Then the little Ice Age which, supposedly, killed millions.

I think the real question(s) is(are): are we speeding up climate change? And, if so, how much?

Regardless, just because Al gore says it's true doesn't mean that it is. Serial.

Brad:
What we have is a political agenda seeking justification

precisely.

And one thing I want to hear, Yo, is what the temperature's SUPPOSED to be.

You hear that the temperature's varying - but what's the selected norm that we're X number of degrees over?

Is it the Medieval Climate Optimum? How about the little ice age? When Greenland was colonized by the Vikings? The temps, as have been pointed out, go all over the map and there's a LOT of variables that haven't been accounted for, my my readings. The temperature on Mars is going up also - so if MARS is warming (for whatever reason) could the temperature on Earth be affected?

Sorry - but those questions haven't ever been answered to my satisifaction...

McIntyre has been the target of a lot of innuendo and slanders among the AGW adherents including among the sycophants of AGW here. But we see that there is real problems with the "science" behind AGW. Note that the critics of AGW want to debate the science, adherents want to debate ad hominem.

wolfwalker:
I reject your premise that this was an error in "complex mathematical formulae." I believe there is nothing complex about it. But since Dr. James Hansen who runs NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and is most responsible for these bad data has made it official GISS policy to not release its temperature aggregation and adjustment methodologies, I guess we will never know.

Hansen refused to cooperate with the McIntyre investigation that found this problem. Steve McIntyre had to reverse engineer the data to conclude there was a problem.

Furthermore, Hansen is the same man who accused the Bush administration of trying to censor his views on climate change. Does this sound like a man who should be in charge of a taxpayer funded organization designed discover the science of the global climate? He should be fired.

I see Mantis and Barney can't break the political love a affair with Algor-abge. Anything he says must be true even when proven wrong. Look people, Algor-abge's history is as a lying politician, not a climate expert. He just used his history (politician full of BS) to sucker people out of millions of dollars and they still haven't woke up to that fact. Next he'll be selling miracle drugs that don't exist and democrats will buy them.

I question the timing.

And I blame the Sun.

"so if MARS is warming"

... is it?!?! Quick, have a concert!

Seems like Al Gore is turning out to be in the fashion of Genghis Khan in the class of documentary makers like Michael Moore in that he goes off half-cocked with only a partial truth and without verifying his facts. What an unfortunate event... the loss of credibility of another patriot political celebrity. Tsk, Tsk.

Until AGW adherents deal with the dishonest behavior of their so-called scientists like Mann and Hansen, I'm going to consider their cause to be a religious one, not a scientific one.

If AGW adherents want to call themselves scientists, then they must actually practice science. And that includes open processes, cooperation with those who are examining their work, and strict adherence to the strictures of the scientific method.

They are not and that is why they are propagandists. We see it above as the sycophants of AGW refuse to deal with the core issue - which is that the secrecy of the GISS series ( which exists only to avoid criticism ) was the reason this error has existed so long.

He played on our fears!

Thanks for repeatedly proving that the right is so myopic that they can not tell the difference between the US and the rest of the world.

Barney, your comment is incoherent as usual. That this data series is of the US rather than global does not change any of the points made above.

First of all, its commonly referenced as a proof of global warming. Secondly, it is actually the highest quality temperature series, and yet still shows these fundamental errors that pervade AGW adherents work.

Separately, there are efforts ongoing to survey the various temperature stations across the US that go into this series.

The results have been astonishing. Large numbers of the stations are compromised by poor siting, or nearby heat generation to cast doubt on all of the conclusions drawn from surface station data.

Here is one example of their findings, a weather station with an A/C unit located next to it. Yep, there's climate change for you.

Al Gore: "Never mind"

"Thanks for repeatedly proving that the right is so myopic that they can not tell the difference between the US and the rest of the world.

Posted by BarneyG2000"

Barney, if you had bothered to READ the article, you would find out that the recalculation of the US data was quietly released and the the recalculation of the World data is still in progress, to be released at a later date.

So, by that admission - by NASA and Hansen - we know that the world GISS data is flawed and therefore unreliable. So, until the new version of that data is released you are quoting the now debunked data!

Have a nice day moonbat!

Thanks Barney, for repeatedly proving that you're so myopic and predictable that you always revert to the "You're so wrong and I'm so right" claim when others simply get tired of your pettifogging and choose to ignore you.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm done with Barney. Even Jim will at least change the tone of his argument once in a while. But Barney's argument will always consist of crap like the difference between "swerve" and "jerk" or citing Cuban healthcare data "provided by Cuba" as gospel.

While others here are actually bringing up valid concerns about contentious issues, Barney's contributions are full of "gotcha" antics and demands of proof, setting standards for that proof that he never sets for those with whom he reflexively agrees with.

Let me cite a "consensus" here for you, Barney; most people here have grown tired of your trifling and niggling. We're not here to convince you of anything. You can accept reasonble answers or not. It's your choice. I personally don't care anymore.

Oh, on station data, see here. Follow ups here, and here.

Mantis demonstrates that AGW is about propaganda rather than science.

The basic point of this post is that the AGW adherents are not practicing science. Their concealment of their methodologies, data and resistance to duplication of their results show this clearly.

The site surveys have shown that there are violations of the standards for siting weather stations. Specifically, they've even shown that sites that Hansen himself ranks as the least affected by urban heat island effects are also compromised. What is the response from mantis? Oh, don't worry ... heat rises.

This is hilarious in the extreme. It is propaganda, not science.

Boo Hoo, you guys made me cry!

Actually you guys don't get it. A correction of a couple hundredth of a degree centigrade does not change the trend of temperature measurements for hundreds and thousands years, and the correlation with increase CO2 saturation. The correction does not change the fact that beginning with the industrial revolution the global temperature TREND has rapidly increased.

Here's more on weather stations.

Barney, still don't get the point do you? Well, you beat that strawman you've built all you want.

Oh, and by the way, Barney, not even the IPCC says that humans have caused warming since the Industrial Revolution. Need to go learn the talking points better.

Okay Mantis. I read the first link and while I'll readily admit that I don't understand most of the scientific lingo and acronyms, among other things, I do have a level of concern regarding "adjusting" temperatures for compromised sites. I suppose if I had the time, I would begin to understand better what he's saying, but the method of adjusting these temps, even though I as a layman wouldn't likely understand it, isn't revealed as far as I can tell. The comment section is replete with others who obviously don't understand either, but accept whatever they hear "on faith". I've never been one to deny that global temps have risen or changed in any way; my beef with Global Warming revellers is of a different nature, so let me be clear that's not my purpose in stating my concern.

Rather than using some mysterious method to "adjust" temp readings and expect others to accept it "on faith" I don't understand why they don't just move these sites so they comply fully with the standards and remove all doubt.