William M Briggs sez he is "statistician to the stars" and claims to "know good physics from bad". He's wrong. Today he's got an article on some god (US-style) blog, that looks as if it's a libertarian (US-style) god blog. Long on faith and free speech and short on fact. I guess William thought he needed to get it in front of climate conspiracy theorists too, because he had Anthony Watts post a short bit of it at WUWT. (Or maybe it's just that Anthony is stuck for articles to fill up his daily quota.)
William faces a conundrum
William can't reconcile the so-called "pause" with the hottest years on record. He wrote:
Which is it? Either it’s hotter than ever or it isn’t. If it is, then (it is implied) man-caused global warming has not “paused.” If it isn’t, if man-caused global warming has “paused,” then it is not growing hotter.
Now William might want to go and have a chat with his favourite co-author, the potty peer Christopher Monckton. He'd soon set him crooked. Thing is, global warming hasn't paused. Sixteen of the twenty hottest years on record have occurred from 2000 onward, including this year, 2015. According to NASA, the hottest years on record are, so far, and in order:
Anomaly over 1951-1980 mean
Did dinosaurs have thermometers?
Early in William's nonsense, he had a link to an article in the Guardian, about how this year is probably going to be another hottest year on record. Then he spent some time saying how wrong that was because it was hotter in the Jurassic.
Now anyone who's read about climate knows that "on record" refers to the instrumental era - back to around 1850, or 1880 in the case of GISTemp. Which raises a question. Does William think that thermometers were invented 4.5 billion years ago and the instrumental record stretches back that far? Or does he think that Earth is only 6,000 years old and was created with weather stations dotted all over the surface, and with Argo floats in every ocean?
According to the stargazer, the future isn't going to happen
Later on he goes on a rant about how observations have been below the modeled mean, the implication being that it's not ever going to get any hotter. Which is pretty dumb of him. He wrote:
Based on this understanding, they said that “disruptive,” “dangerous” global warming would soon be upon us. It didn’t happen. What went wrong? El Niño, they say.So the temperatures of the 2030s and 2050s and 2100s haven't happened yet therefore they aren't ever going to? What sort of twisted logic is that? It's no wonder William has so much spare time to devote to climate science denial. What star would want to hire him to do their statistics?
Crazy or stooge?
William doesn't much like a paper by Professor Lewandowsky and co. Or Professor Lewandowsky's work in general. He wrote:
The point of this new paper is the same as all of Lewandowsky’s works. He wants to paint detractors of The Consensus as crazy or oil-industry stooges.I don't believe that Stephan Lewandowsky has psychoanalysed William M. Briggs and I doubt he ever would. I'll do a freeby for William. Based on his latest bit of nonsense, I'd say he's not an oil-industry stooge. It's the other cap that fits :D