Happy Anniversary RealClimate.org - Ten Years of sharing real science

H/T to Sou at Hotwhopper

I'm surprised to find it's already been a decade since RealClimate.org began. It's sad reflecting on the malicious dirty tricks and lies they've been subjected to, though it's reassuring to know they have survived and continue to offer the highest quality climate science information to those who are interested in learning.

To celebrate I'm going to share some of their anniversary write up and also their original introductory post since it's a nice encapsulation of the sad state of affairs, tragically as true today as a decade ago, and their commitment to help rational folks sieve through all the competing claims and evidence. 

Ten Years of RealClimate

Filed under: Climate Science Communicating Climate — group @ 10 December 2014

In the spring of 2004, when we (individually) first started talking to people about starting a blog on climate science, almost everyone thought it was a great idea, but very few thought it was something they should get involved in. Today, scientists communicating on social media is far more commonplace. On the occasion of our 10 year anniversary today it is worth reflecting on the impact of those changes, what we’ve learned and where we go next.

Why we started and why we continue

The introductory post Welcome to RealClimate set out our aspiration:

RealClimate is a commentary site on climate science by working climate scientists for the interested public and journalists. We aim to provide a quick response to developing stories and provide the context sometimes missing in mainstream commentary.

Steele's Ocean Acidification Horror Story, a closer look.

Examining some of the claims in the YouTube video "Recovering Whales, Ocean Acidification, and Climate Horror Stories," I wrote 
Dr. Evans, who's data Steele uses and he responded to my questions with an enlightening email, along with suggestions for further investigation.   Now that I've spent more time looking into the question of 'what' and 'how' scientists know about ocean acidification, I've decided to give Steele's talk from 2:45 to 5:59 another dissection.  

For students of The Art of the Republican Attack on Science, this will be worth your while. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Recovering Whales, Ocean Acidification, and Climate Horror Stories by JIm Steele (2:45-5:59)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooaZLoJXhu4&t=2m45s

Part 3 Jim Steele's Presentation to the Life Members of the International Electrical and Electronic Engineers. Jim is the author of "Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist's Journey to Climate Skepticism"

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

2:45 - "Here's your question about ocean acidification.  This upwelling is a tremendous benefit.  If you do a vertical profile of the ocean, if you look at the surface the pH is gonna be around 8.2-8.3, as you drop down what you see is that it very quickly it becomes more acidic, because bacteria digest everything, we start to releasing the carbon. So you can see in the upwelling zones you can see it's down to 7.7 And when it upwells it brings it right to the coast"

~ ~ ~
First off, notice Jim drawing his audience's attention away from how the oceans absorb CO2, instead focusing on regional upwelling of abyssal acidic waters along the continental shelf.

That's the way magicians work, draw the eye away from where the trick is happening.

Listen in on Steele's talk.  You'll hear a hint of the problem he chooses to ignore.  The surface of the ocean is on average basic ~8.2-8.3pH as Steele tells us {7 being neutral}.  CO2 is acidic and easily binds with water molecules.  We live in a world where the atmospheric CO2 concentration has skyrocketed by ~40% in a geologic blink.  How will that system behave?    How can Steele's IEEE audience be blind to that?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

3:20 - "People say on average the pH is getting more, they don't know that.  It's a model."

AmericanThinker: Another hottest year since 1880, Murphy Say What?

On the way to doing other things this morning, I came across a freshly minted article at the AmericanThinker written by one Paul Murphy.  Going through it, I thought: Great, just what we need, another rambling kindergarden-ish cherry-picking collage.  Yea, sure, climate has always changed, tell us something we don't know.  Thing is we are living in today, and it today's radical human caused global warming is unique and it matters to our future!  

Then it started ragging on SkepticalScience.com with childish reasoning and I decided here was another article for my collection.  Though, this time my review will be short, mainly a few observations, followed by a listing of some recent studies looking at what's happening at the North and South Poles of our one and only Earth.

"Yet Another Hottest Year Since 1880?" 

By Paul Austin Murphy | 12/6/2014
www.AmericanThinker.com

How to Debate Every Time - Troll Redsilverj

{edited 12/11/14 evening}
I came across a video that's too ridiculous to share or talk about, except that it did remind me of a simple experiment people can do to understand why warming our Global Heat Distribution Engine (system) read "Climate" will result in way wilder weather than we are prepared to deal with.

And it's also my own little experiment to check out my new concept about tracking YouTube comments with screenshots.
 {Updated 12/7/12, early - H/T Potholer54}

There are two kinds of skeptics, 
complete skeptic (that includes self-skepticism) and 
one-directional skeptic (aka contrarian types) 

There are two kinds of debate, 
one where 
learning is the goal,
the other 
debate for debate {and fortune'$} sake.

In the first 
you listen to and weigh your opponent's information and arguments, with the goal being to use opposing arguments to better understand one's own reasoning and justifications.

To learn from evidence and arguments... allowing the best to inspire reevaluating our own understanding.  That's how we learn, and evolve, how we get better and move forward as we travel through our short lives. Hey and sometimes it hurts and our egos get bruised but that's part of the game of life and growing...  know what I mean?

The second is 
all about personal point scoring 
relying on tricks rather than a serious dialogue 
it has no interest in learning or truth, 
only in "winning".

Recovering Whales, Ocean Acidification the Jim Steele Horror Story - reviewed

Or, what a tangled web Steele weaves.

There's a tactic called the "Gish Gallop" where a speaker tosses out so many varied claims that it's impossible for the serious listener to keep up.  Steele has perfected this skill, but it's easy for him since his audience (Life Members of the International Electrical and Electronic Engineers) only wants to hear reassurances that they have nothing to worry about and can continue consuming like there's no tomorrow. 

I'm more serious and skeptical, so I've taken the time to chase after the various bones Steele tosses out.  This post will focus on his claims regarding whale population recovery thanks to La Nina along with Steele's bizarre take on the ocean acidification story*
*{for an update on that mischief, link here}. 

Recovering Whales, Ocean Acidification, and Climate Horror Stories by JIm Steele (considering 0:00 to 6:00)

update December 8, 2014

Wiley Evans, Ph.D. shares some thoughts regarding Steele's description of ocean pH studies.

Steele's Yosemite Nat'l Park mystery temp graph? W.U.W.T.?

There's a temperature graph going around the blogosphere claiming to represent the temperature trend in Yosemite National Park since 1900.  Climate science denialist types love this graph because it seems to indicate no warming in Yosemite, as if that represents the whole state or something.  

Besides, consider Yosemite National Park, it comprises some 1,169 square miles ^- (3,027 km²) with an elevation range from 2,127 to 13,114 feet (648 to 3,997 m) on both sides of the Sierra Nevada mountain divide.  Vegetation zones start with chaparral oakwoodland, lower montane forest, upper montane forest, subalpine zone, all the way up to alpine.  Seemed odd that anyone would claim a single graph from YNP as some definitive statement on the situation within the park, let alone beyond.  

Yet Mr. Steele claims it, and does so on many occasions.  Including this recent video (12:10) which I'm in the process of reviewing.  He never tells us where this data came from, nor who compiled the graph, we're supposed to accept the authority of his word on it - 
I thought they rejected appeals to authority?

Unfortunately, I've learned to be skeptical of Mr. Steele's claims and I tried finding its origin.  No luck on the internet.  Finally I sent an email to the Western Regional Climate Center to see if they could offer any insight and they certainly did.  
I share their response:
{I added paragraph breaks for clarity}

WRCC Data <wrcc@dri.edu> December 1, 2014 

"Hello,  

This is not one of our graphs and I’m not exactly sure where this data was recorded.  

The official coop station Yosemite Park Headquarters began collecting temperature data in 1907 and this graph began in 1900.  There are several issues with this graph - spelling for starters, we would also reference the WRCC so others could contact us if there was a question and these numbers are off.    

Looking at the data, these numbers and years are not correct.  For example, the average annual max temperature occurred in 1926, not 1930-something as the graph displays..  

I’m sorry, I cannot help you.  I’ve tried to find this graph but no luck. I can tell you this is not our graph nor is the data correct."   

signed by the Service Climatologist,  

Western Regional Climate Center

The mystery graph

Jim Steele, why you "cleansing" YouTube comments? W.U.W.T.?

I've been spending the past couple days reviewing Jim Steele's third video in his series dedicated to attacking climate scientists.  While listening to the video and transcribing his talk, (this time without the marginal aid of YouTube's transcriptions, since it appears he turned it off for this video), I've also been researching his claims - which offer up more puzzles than answers. So, I've been posting constructive questions to Jim Steele in the comments section, along with requests for citations - since most of the time he doesn't offer any information about the data and "official" claims he presents.  

My questions seemed to be getting posted, yet I just discovered that they appear to only being visible under my log in and that anyone else viewing this video sees none of my reasonable, if skeptical questions.  

What can I say, except that, here is yet another example of the dishonest battle against rational, constructive discussion, that this WattsUpWithThat team wages.  Yet this Mr. Steele is the same man who has the chutzpah to quote Carl Sagan and lecture scientists about how to conduct an honest investigation.

My review will follow, but for now I want to post the questions that Steele has cleansed from his one sided presentation.

Recovering Whales, Ocean Acidification, and Climate Horror Stories by JIm Steele