The tree ring data you call “highly problematic” is the whole point! The paleoclimate model that’s used to “prove” that it’s warmer than ever before is based on that “highly problematic” tree ring data. Michael Mann’s hockey stick chart is based on it, until the data didn’t agree with what he was trying to say, or OBSERVABLE REALITY (actual measured temps).

Nobody suggsested that the climate models are wrong because they are written in FORTRAN. What matters is what the FORTRAN code DOES, with subroutines called “Apply a very artificial correction” and the like. Inputting random strings of numbers into the program will 9 times in 10 produce a hockey-stick result.

Try again.

TRICKS ““I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” In scientific and mathematical writing, a “trick” means a “technique”. For example, in “The Number System”, by H.A. Thurston, you may read: “The trick is to use a set of signs in fixed order.” The “trick” referred to here is writing 1, 2, 3, instead of [,], [..], [...]. And the “real temps” that Jones referred to is a set of data obtained directly from thermometers and other instruments, rather than a set of highly problematic data inferred from the width of tree rings. This can be interpreted as manipulation only if using the best available data instead problematic data can be so called.

COMPUTER MODELS ““The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.” This statement has nothing to do with computer models. It appeared in an article the Kevin Trenberth wrote describing the need for better instrumentation. As the quote itself indicates, this statement is about the “observing system” — i.e., the sets of sensors deployed in a part of the ocean. Instrumental readings from one part of the ocean were lower than could be accounted for by the laws of science and contradicted expectations created by other sets of data. Trenberth’s response was not to fudge the figures, but to ask for better temperature recording instruments to determine whether the anomaly resulted from the instrumentation.

FORTRAN “It’s coded in an old. Largely [sic] outdated programming language called FORTRAN.” Well, FORTAN (Formula Translator) may be an old programming language, but it is nevertheless a powerful and reliable language, in which vast numbers of proven scientific applications are written. To suggest that climate models are inaccurate because they are written in FORTRAN is ludicrous.

As for resisting FOI requests, the scientists at CRU were wrong to resist, or suggest resisting them. Nevertheless, one of the dangers of freedom of information laws is their use by hostile parties as instruments of harassment. That is what the CRU was facing. Resisting the law is of course not the answer, but there is clearly a problem here that needs to be fixed.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1450512437/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

The details of how the mails came to light is covered here

http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/12/the-mosher-timeline/

drop me a line at moshersteven–at–gmail

I had an English Literature professor who said that a sociologist is one who “spends thousands of dollars and several years, doing extensive research to prove that children get upset when you scream at them.” Nuff said.

Incidently I agree totally with your point on “averages.

In real sciences, including the social sciences, averages went out with slide rules. The primitives who talk about global average temperatures start about by averaging the low and high temperatures for each reporting site. Taking only the high and low numbers in an irregularly distributed set of numbers produces a number which does not represent the set as a whole.

Such an average can represent various different conditions. For example, an average temperature of 75 F could represent the following sets of high and low temperatures (100,50 – which can occur in deserts) (90,60) and (65, 85) which represent different climate conditions. A lower average temperature could produce more melting of ice if the temperature remains above freezing under the lower average temperature and the higher average represents a situation in which the temperature was above freezing for only 5 or 6 hours.