Climategate 2 – Episode 3 of David Rose’s Epic Saga

This morning’s instalment of the Mail on Sunday’s serialisation of David Rose’s latest piece of fantasy fiction is headlined as follows:

US Congress launches a probe into climate data that duped world leaders over global warming

David is a bit slow on the uptake, since we reported on the “US Congress probe” several days ago. He also seems not to have taken on board any of the copious quantities of evidence that his “climate data that duped world leaders over global warming” allegations are the purest fantasy. This time around Mr. Rose claims, amongst other things:

Last week Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring at the UK Met Office, admitted that notwithstanding the Pausebuster, it was clear ‘the slowdown hasn’t gone away’.

The ‘pause’ is clearly visible in the Met Office’s ‘HadCRUT 4’ climate dataset, calculated independently of NOAA.

Let’s see if we can discover if Peter Stott has any recollection of being interviewed last week by the Mail on Sunday and/or The Mail’s leading fantasy fiction writer shall we?

Here’s the HadCRUT 4 data we’ve been showing assorted “skeptical” fellows on Twitter this week:

Perhaps David Rose can assist them by pointing out where exactly the alleged “pause” is located?

 

[Edit – February 19th PM]

Peter Stott has confirmed my suspicions. David Rose’s “last week” was egregiously inaccurate:

In addition John Kennedy, also from the UK Met Office, pointed out to Mr. Rose that:

Do you suppose that David & Judy have another “whistleblower” embedded deep within the Hadley Centre?

 

[Edit – March 4th]

The UK Met Office have at long last published the HadCRUT4 January 2017 update:

A theory is proposed that doesn’t involve time travel:

 

[Edit – March 18th]

The online version of the Mail on Sunday have just published a “correction” to the most egregious of their long list of recent errors and inaccuracies. It reads as follows:

On February 19 we reported a Met Office official’s announcement that the average global temperature in January 2017 was about the same as in January 1998. In fact, this was incorrect, and the temperature was 0.25C higher.

So there you have it. This buck doesn’t stop on David Rose’s desk, or Benny Peiser’s desk, or John Wellington’s desk, or Geordie Greig’s desk. We’re expected to believe it stops on an unidentified desk of an unknown official somewhere inside the UK Met Office.

We won’t get fooled again. Will we?

 

[Edit – March 19th]

The expert opinion of Peter Thorne (op. cit.) on the Mail on Sunday’s excuse for a “correction”:

6 thoughts on “Climategate 2 – Episode 3 of David Rose’s Epic Saga

  1. The January numbers for HadCRUT 4.5 have finally come out. The global anomaly was 3rd highest for the month (behind Jan 2016 and Jan 2007) and thus clearly proves the continuing well-being of the “paws”.

  2. Interesting hypothesis!

    On the 14th Feb, I put up a comment on the Global Surface Temperatures thread of the ASIF concerning both the HadSST and the BEST datasets. The Jan 2017 data points on each of these was the second highest January value for the relevant dataset.

    DM+GWPF = BoT

    (Bunch of tossers)

  3. Jim,

    In Rose’s malodorous article, he claimed that the HadCRUT values for 2017 and 1998 were just about identical. As has been pointed out, this would have involved something akin to time travel, as the HadCRUT figures were not published until a couple of weeks after the publication of the Mail article.

    Of course there could just be an astonishing coincidence at work here, but I rather suspect I may have found the real reason behind his cock-up.

    HadCRUT 4.5 Jan 1998 anomaly +0.485 deg C
    HadSST 3.1.1 Jan 2017 anomaly +0.484 deg C

    The HadSST figures tend to come out several weeks in advance of the equivalent HadCRUT figures, so that could easily explain where Rose obtained the incorrect value. Seems like he is incapable of telling the difference between a Land+Ocean dataset and an Ocean-only dataset, and it would be ever so embarrassing to have to own up to such a brainless mistake.

    Pathetic!

  4. This news, on the other hand, comes as no shock whatsoever. The Mail on Sunday have just published an apology for a “correction” to the same egregious error as the GWPF.

    Read all about it above.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *