The Conspiracy of the Like Minded-truth in data as big lie

Posted: January 31, 2014 by tallbloke in solar system dynamics

w.w.wygart’s thoughts on the MET-O spaghetti scribbles, with some considerable detail on IPCC model forecasts of continued, even accelerated warming…

The Coraline Meme

Update – I’ve added a new figure Fig. 4a below, a version of the AR5 SOD Fig. 1.4 with the “grey swoosh” redacted.

Today, after giving my opinion on the subject of Syria, my sister told me I was being, “Negative, pessimistic, and paranoid” – all possibly true – but being a scientist I am driven to that position by the apprehension of the evidence.

Later in the day I came across the above graphic from the UK MetOffice’s 2014 Decadal Forecast over at Tallbloke’s Talkshop in an article entitled MET- Office: New four year ‘decadal’ forecast spaghetti.  This is what fellow WordPressian Tallbloke had to say:

Ed Hawkins tweeted up  the latest offering from the MET-Office this morning. It’s a “Decadal forecast”, which runs from now to the beginning (not the end, Ed) of 2018. Stop tittering at the back there! But compounding matters, the ‘forecast’ is…

View original post 1,492 more words

Comments
  1. oldbrew says:

    Could there be a kind of group cognitive dissonance going on here? The Met Office knows perfectly well almost all of its warming forecasts have tanked for over a decade but it still keeps churning them out, like a gambler who feels sure they must win next time, or at least soon.

    Guess who’s making a right charlie of himself today? Sounding like Al Gore circa 2008…

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10610108/Prince-Charles-climate-change-deniers-are-headless-chickens.html

    The world has moved on squire, sorry.

  2. Jerry Lundry says:

    This is a prediction less than completely sound, as it is based on records limited to the period 1981-2010. The so-called thirty year cycle reached its minimum temperature about 1974 and its next peak in 2003. While temperatures have been dropping since 2003 (not “pausing”), the 22-year period (1981-2003) of rising temperature will tend to dominate the 8-year period (2003-2010) of lowering temperature when used to project beyond the present by most projection schemes. A projection that honors temperature data through 2-3 cycles of the thirty-year cycle, and that cycle itself, would surely be more realistic.

  3. colliemum says:

    I read the whole thing and agree with w.w.wygart’s thoughts: people sitting around a screen and going: ooh – lovely, make it more red/green – no, too dark, what would look good with green …
    It’s post-science science …

  4. Sparks says:

    Surly he doesn’t mean people who are sceptical of ‘Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming’.

  5. w.w.wygart says:

    Oldbrew,

    I tend to agree. In my more paranoid moments I think that some of these CAGW people REALLY don’t care if their errors, and machinations are exposed on a daily basis, they just want to get their message out to those most likely to believe it. If that is so, what then are their real motives? How paranoid do we need to be?

    My point has been that people committed to the catastrophic view of climate appear to have a need to continue to produce threatening and scary imagery to keep belief their position from collapsing completely, or have something for the local bunny population to point to validate their position.

    Naturally ‘they’ say the same thing about ‘us’. ‘We’ also tend to function as a “conspiracy of the like minded” to a certain degree, its just that the burden of proof of CAGW isn’t on ‘us’. The burden ‘we’ carry is to force the catastrophists to prove their position, expose their mistakes and misdeeds, correct their errors, and give public access to the genuine science.

    W^3

  6. michael hart says:

    The Met Office really needs to do a better job of explaining why anyone, anywhere, ever, is interested in a hindcast.

    You know, if someone is willing to pay me enough, I will hindcast every stock-exchange index for the last 100 years. And every horse race too. And I can tell you now, they will be great hindcasts. Worth every penny.

  7. Brian H says:

    The purpose of plastering a bunch of spaghetti strands over the forecast is to — they hope — get at least one strand within shouting distance of the observations, for a brief interval. They ain’t got nothin’ else to hope for with those models.