'Climategate' Phil Jones interviewed by BBC

See the BBC interview here. BBC has a general discussion of the interview here.

This interview has some pretty amazing points. Jones has spent the better part of the past 25 years toiling to convince the world of CO2-forced 20th-century warming, but now admitting that the difference in warming rates for the periods 1860-1880, 1910-40 and 1975-2009 is statistically insignificant. Jones even acceded that there has been no statistically-significant global warming since 1995; that in fact, global temperatures have been trending to the downside since January of 2002, although he denied the statistical significance of the -0.12C per decade decline.

Jones is now conceding some interesting facts, particularly that this recent warming period might not be particularly unusual.

There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia. For it to be global in extent the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern Hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.

Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today (based on an equivalent coverage over the NH and SH) then obviously the late-20th century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm that today, then current warmth would be unprecedented. . . .

The UK Daily Mail pointed to these three issues:

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing
There has been no global warming since 1995
Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

Labels: , ,


Blogger juandos said...

The UK Daily Mail is all over this story also:

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

2/14/2010 5:49 AM  
Blogger John A said...

" now admitting that the difference in warming rates for the periods 1860-1880, 1910-40 and 1975-2009 is statistically insignificant."

1975-1998 in the original interview - well sort of, both 1998 and 2009 used as end-points. But when did he know the 75-98 rates? And why support the 2001 [amd 2007] Mann hockeystick, which claimed the latter was VASTLY different from the former?

As to the Medieval Warm, since the Southern Hemisphere data is not as large a dataset it seems quite correct - to him and the rest of the AGW types - to assume it to have been so much colder as to mean that globally the temperature was colder than at present.

And on and on, spinning more than a child's top...

2/14/2010 9:16 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home