I am reading the updated version of Unsettled by Steven Koonin, the former US undersecretary for Science in the Obama Administration. There is a clear tendency for climate scientists to bias the historic temperature towards record temperatures. Here are some examples:
- Climate Science Special Report is misleading. One of the problems with measuring changes in climate based on a temperature series is that the early record temperatures occur more frequently simply because of sampling bias.
- Tuning: A paper laying out the details of one of the most esteemed models, that of the Max Planck Institute, tells of tuning a subgrid parameter (relating to convection in the atmosphere) because the one originally chosen resulted in twice as much warming as had been observed !
- He shows how selective cuts in the data for climate effects for Tornados, Rainfall, etc. often increase and exaggerate the effects.
- Number of record temperatures in the US temperature data is simply dependent on the selection criteria ! etc.
His main criticism of Climate Change scientists seems to be their (apparent) tendency to somewhat exaggerate the anthropogenic effects on climate, basically because their careers depend on it.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair
Particularly notable is the coorealation between climate change “scepticism” and direct or indirect funding from the fossil fuel lobby.
Also particularly notable is the coorealation (sic) between climate change “alarmism” and the (orders of magnitude) greater funding from everywhere else!
Certainly not in my case.
No mention of peak oil or depletion in Koonin’s book, despite the fact that Koonin was undersecretary of science for Obama’s Department of Energy. No point in reading anything in there unless he is hashing fluid dynamics code.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Unsettled_Updated_and_Expanded_Edition/owA_0AEACAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=peak%20oil
Sounds about right 🙂