NASA revises temperature changes - down
Posted by BrianWow, this is quite significant. Apparently a blogger realized that some of the extreme temperature changes noticed around the turn of the millennium were the result of a Y2K error. Supposedly NASA has admitted the error and has released revised numbers.
NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II.
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’ve long been skeptical of the long term predictions made by global warming alarmists, mainly because of my understanding of computer simulations and the growth in prediction error as a function of time due to many phenomena. It’s not that I don’t believe that we are harming the environment, it’s just that some of the wild claims based on computer models border on technological malpractice. My concerns were based on the belief that the scientists would at least get their damn codes correct.
This kind of incident really makes one curious about how rigorously these codes are being peer reviewed. Part of their inherent problem is that the results can’t be proven since you have to wait and see if the weather matches the simulation. So who knows what other little bugs might be buried within these complicated codes. Keep this in mind before you get too excited over someone’s computer predictions about the global weather decades from now.
Related content:
August 10th, 2007 at 7:41 am
Brian, thoughts?
Judicial panel picks 3 for post
Page 2 of 2
Hall, 44, a lawyer with the Huntsville firm Spurrier, Rice & Hall, specializes in personal injury defense, arson and fraud investigation cases. The 17-year veteran lawyer was a clear favorite during the first round. She received eight votes.
In her presentation, Hall said the court should find alternative programs to keep juveniles out of the revolving door of the criminal justice system.
“If we can intervene early, that would be the best thing,” she said.
Judicial panel
Hall, (REPUBLICAN) the sister-in-law of Madison County Circuit Judge Karen K. Hall, said the court should seek to reactivate its inactive three-member juvenile advisory committee. The committee had the power to impose punishment in the cases of first-time juvenile criminal offenses that did not involve drugs or violence.
“It is inactive at this time because there is not enough money to fund it,” she said.
The county spends $7 million a year to house and feed over 500 inmates. If the number of prisoners could be cut in half, the county would be able to fund other programs like mental health and drug courts and other diversion programs, she said.
Siniard, Wills, Hardin, Danner, Pate and Batchelor all voted for Starnes.
Starnes, 43, an assistant district attorney for 15 years, prosecutes mainly violent crimes.
A 17-year veteran lawyer, Starnes (REPUBLICAN) said because of the weight of the case load, judges in district court have to make decisions quickly. The judges have to be efficient and innovative, he said.
Casting their votes
Brown, Hardin, Danner and Pate voted for Rich. Siniard, Lockhart and Batchelor voted for Clark. Hardin and Brown cast a vote each for Robinson.
In the runoff, Wills, Lockhart, Batchelor, and Siniard voted for Clark. Pate, Hardin, Danner and Brown voted for Rich. Smith broke the 4-4 tie by voting for Rich, 42, (a DEMOCRAT) a lawyer with the Sirote & Permutt firm and assistant attorney for Madison County.
Both Clark and Rich are quality lawyers but, Smith said, his decision was based “on the years of litigation and experience Mr. Rich has had.”
August 10th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Interesting. Thanks for the notice - I’ll be keeping my eyes on that.
August 13th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
I agree with you on the folly of using mathematical models to make long-term climate predictions. I spent about 35 years of my life developing and using math models to evaluate weapon system performance for the Air Force. Models are reasonably reliable for studying trends but not very good at predicting actual outcomes. I’ve been working on a post using my experience with models to show why most of what the glowarm alarmists are saying is baseless.