csua.org/u/jaz -> www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm
While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or "jump" in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000. These graphs were created by NASA's Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change). Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.
The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought), but the effect on the US global warming propaganda machine could be huge. I strongly suspect this story will receive little to no attention from the mainstream media.
Kuroyama on 8/9/2007 3:55:34 PM , Rating: 2 Dear Masher2 and Dailytech editors, This is allegedly a site about new technology. Perhaps you could remind Masher2 about this, because in the last month he has written 5 columns on the debate over global warming, and of the 22 columns he has edited I count only 4 -- on big engineering, hd format wars, human-habitable planet, general purpose CPU -- that did not mention global warming or CO2 emissions. Would it be unreasonable to ask that at least half his columns on this technology site not mention CO2 emissions or global warming?
On CNN's "Science/Tech" page right now are 5 articles (out of 11) that deal with environmental issues. Dailytech, on the other hand, averages less than one such story per week. Are you truly offended by the level of coverage, or are you annoyed because the facts presented don't agree with your own particular viewpoint?
Kuroyama on 8/9/2007 4:38:53 PM , Rating: 2 By the level of coverage. I find your posts interesting and will continue to read them as long as they appear here, but do not think that Dailytech is the correct forum for them And BTW, I agree that CNN's "Science/Tech" page is a POS, and most (though not all) coverage of climate change in the mass media is sensationalist and hardly worth being taken seriously (which is not to say that bad media coverage makes "global climate change" an incorrect hypothesis).
Kuroyama on 8/9/2007 4:44:07 PM , Rating: 2 Let me re-phrase that. It is not the "level of coverage" per-se, but the quantity that bothers me. For instance, a once a month blog on climate change issues would be nice.
A recent survey on our IP logs showed traffic from every major US national lab. We've had articles with almost half the refer traffic from NASA and NOAA. Mr Asher's posts do have a particular trend -- he focuses more on a counter-point angle to global warming. I think this is a point that is often overlooked in mainstream media. If anyone would like to construct well-researched posts that disagree with Mr Asher's posts, I'd be more than willing to post those on DailyTech as well.
Kuroyama on 8/9/2007 7:32:59 PM , Rating: 2 Glad to hear about the high NASA/NOAA traffic. And Masher, don't keep saying "You won't find this in the mainstream media", it got old a long time ago. No one likes someone who cries victim all the time, regardless of whether their if their point is otherwise valid. And drop some of the sensationalism you complain about so much, for instance when holding up Greenpeace or some wacky politicians proposing a 100mph max speed for a car (which was neither a science nor technology article) as if they were the norm. Are all Republicans racists if so-and-so Republican big wig says such-and-such a stupid thing? Next time a big climate study or "environmental disaster" comes along why don't you wait a week or so and then write a column on how the so-called "quality media" sources (say NYTimes & Washington Post, not CNN/ABC/etc) sensationalized and misreported the facts. For instance, all too often the worst case scenario is hyped, as in "UN report says ocean level to rise by a gazillion feet by the year 2100" when in fact said report might say there is a 1% chance of this. Or all the "major radiation leak" headlines after the recent Japan earthquake. Ironically, despite your claims to the contrary, a careful reading between the lines of these articles usually does turn up the reality of the UN report / Japan earthquake / etc.
Kuroyama on 8/9/2007 7:36:04 PM , Rating: 2 God that post had a lot of typos. And I've made my point now, so never fear, I won't post any more complaints here on this.
Ringold on 8/9/2007 9:38:13 PM , Rating: 2 quote: We've had articles with almost half the refer traffic from NASA and NOAA. When people complain at places like DT about NASA's failures it seems like at least middle management gets the picture (as do employees all the way down the food chain, though I'll leave everyone to find their way to the appropriate message boards themselves). It doesn't change the fact that the top brass at many of these places are incompetent, but at the ground level some of these places are more responsive than it initially would appear. Just to take an example, from what I gather, the rank and file at NASA knows that the current Orion/Ares I/Ares V setup is a recipe for, at best, mediocrity, at worst, a huge existential risk. The brightest optimists seem to think that NASA will see the Democrats, after years of delays, budget over-runs and feature reductions, scrap the moon plans all together, and NASA will wake up one day in the next decade and find itself with an Orion doing nothing but taxi duty to the ISS. With no highly reuseable (now that it's water landing, the reuse of the Orion modules may be reduced), expensive spacecraft like the Shuttle sitting around, and a large chunk of the costs being in marginal launch costs rather than sunk investment sitting in a hanger, it becomes very, very easy to drop the entire program. Which is just the same thing that's been repeated in DT comments by various people, which makes me wonder how many of them were NASA themselves. So, that's just interesting that people at these places really do swing by and get exposed to a little public opinion. I think it also says something of the quality of coverage, perhaps, provided by DT that these sort of people would frequent this site. Back to EVE Online to sooth the nerves after a down 387 DOW day.
jacarte8 on 8/10/2007 1:28:22 PM , Rating: 2 I really enjoy articles on all topics. don't read articles on global warming if you don't want to. I find them interesting, and to be HIGHLY technology-related. The huge emphasis places on eco-friendly technology hinges on this debate, and I like to see it covered from both sides (which I think Dailytech does a great job of).
Keeir on 8/9/2007 4:11:18 PM , Rating: 5 Dear Kuroyama Please note that this "column" is actually a BLOG maintained free of charge by M Asher. M Asher has, as stated by Editor Kristopher Kubicki, been offered the ability to post a blog on Dailytech due to high number of relevent and researched posts made in the past. Although his BLOG posts are rarely about consumer technology, they are usually, with some exceptions, well-researched pieces about scientific data and scientific arguement. In future, avoid BLOG posts by M Asher (Masher2) if you do not wish to read about CO2 emissions or global warming.
blackseed on 8/10/2007 12:24:52 PM , Rating: 2 Although I not a fan of Masher's point of view towards global warming, I really, love the points that he makes. If new Mashers BLOG comes up, I find myself dashing for information that he is providing.
glitchc on 8/9/2007 12:11:20 PM , Rating: 3 The data also shows a consistent increase in temperature since 1985, barring anomalies. This is illustrated by the 5-year moving average window which is consistently higher than the mean for the entire range. Just wanted to point out something masher failed to mention in his article....
Martimus on 8/9/2007 3:45:05 PM , Rating: 4 Because that is when Marty McFly went back in time using his Delorean Time Machine. That 121 jigawatts really caused a lot of heat to begin the global warming phenomenon.
RobinGoodfellow on 8/9/2007 3:54:43 PM , Rating: 2 There is a similar consistent increase in temperature between 192...
|
http://csua.com/feed/