Fred Singer's letter to Washington Post re BEST/Muller climate theories

Update, 12/1/11: The Washington Post told Mr. Singer they would be willing to publish his letter but not his credentials. Apparently they did not want readers to think he knew about climate. Citation below this post via Forbes Magazine, Carrera.

10/25/11, "(Fred) Singer’s letter to WaPo on BEST," WUWT

"The scientific finding that does not settle the climate-change debate"

S. Fred Singer Letter to WashPost Oct 25, 2011**

"Before you write off Bachmann, Cain, and Perry as cynical diehards, deniers, idiots, or whatever, [WashPost Oct 24] consider this:

Why are you surprised by the results of the Berkeley Climate Project? They used data from the same weather stations as the Climategate people, but reported that one-third showed cooling — not warming.

They covered the same land area – less than 30% of the Earth’s surface – with recording stations that are poorly distributed, mainly in US and Western Europe. They state that

• 70% of US stations are badly sited

and don’t meet the standards set by government; the rest of the world is likely worse.

Unlike the land surface, the atmosphere showed no warming trend, either over land or over ocean — according to satellites and independent data from weather balloons. This indicates to me that there is something very wrong with the land surface data. And did you know that the climate models, run on super-computers,

• all show that the atmosphere must warm faster than the surface. What does this tell you?

And finally, we have non-thermometer temperature data from so-called “proxies”:

• tree rings, ice cores, ocean sediments, stalagmites.
  

• They don’t show any global warming since 1940!

The Berkeley results in no way confirm the scientifically discredited Hockeystick graph, which had been so eagerly adopted by climate alarmists. In fact, the Hockeystick authors

• have never published their temperature results after 1978.
  

The reason for hiding them? It’s likely that their proxy data show no warming either.

One last word: In their scientific paper, submitted for peer review, the Berkeley scientists disclaim knowing the cause of the temperature increase reported by their project. However, their research paper comments:

• “The human component of global warming may be somewhat overestimated.”

I commend them for their honesty and skepticism.

********************************************************************
S. Fred Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project. He is a Senior Fellow of the Heartland Institute and of the Independent Institute. His specialty is atmospheric and space physics. An expert in remote sensing and satellites, he served as the founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service and, more recently, as vice chair of the US National Advisory Committee on Oceans & Atmosphere. He is co-author of Climate Change Reconsidered [2009 and 2011] and of Unstoppable Global Warming [2007]

**Responding to: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-scientific-finding-that-settles-the-climate-change-debate/2011/03/01/gIQAd6QfDM_story.html?wpisrc=emailtoafriend"

------------

Update, 12/1/11, "Salvaging The Mythology Of Man-Caused Global Warming," Forbes, Peter Ferrara

"When Singer sent a letter to the editor to the global warming cheerleading Washington Post, pointing out the above anomalies and his conclusion, he reports the peculiar response that “they were willing to publish my letter, but not my credentials as emeritus professor at the University of Virginia and former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service.

• Apparently they were concerned that
  

• readers might gain the impression that I knew something about climate.”"

via Tom Nelson