Difference between revisions of "Steve McIntyre"
(Category) |
(U.S., not worldwide. Added refs for both.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Steve McIntyre''' is a statistician with decades of experience in the mineral exploration business. He is best known for his scientific paper pointing out errors in the "[[hockey stick graph]]" used by the [[IPCC]] to justify the [[Anthropogenic global warming]] theory. | '''Steve McIntyre''' is a statistician with decades of experience in the mineral exploration business. He is best known for his scientific paper pointing out errors in the "[[hockey stick graph]]" used by the [[IPCC]] to justify the [[Anthropogenic global warming]] theory. | ||
| − | He also forced NASA to admit that 1998 was not the hottest year on record | + | He also forced NASA to admit that 1998 was not the hottest year on record in the United States, as had been previously thought.<ref>[http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1878 Will the Real USHCN Data Set Please Stand Up?]</ref> This somewhat blunted one of the main claims of global warming activists; see [[Anthropogenic global warming theory]]. However, 1998 is still considered the hottest year on a worldwide basis.<ref>[http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/anomalies/anomalies.html#sr05 Global Surface Temperature Anamolies]</ref> |
==Quotations== | ==Quotations== | ||
Revision as of 15:38, June 5, 2008
Steve McIntyre is a statistician with decades of experience in the mineral exploration business. He is best known for his scientific paper pointing out errors in the "hockey stick graph" used by the IPCC to justify the Anthropogenic global warming theory.
He also forced NASA to admit that 1998 was not the hottest year on record in the United States, as had been previously thought.[1] This somewhat blunted one of the main claims of global warming activists; see Anthropogenic global warming theory. However, 1998 is still considered the hottest year on a worldwide basis.[2]
Quotations
I've found that scientists strongly resent any attempt to verify their results. One of the typical reactions is: don't check our studies, do your own study. I don't think that businesses like being checked either, but one of the preconditions of being allowed to operate is that they are checked. Many of the most highly paid professionals in our society - securities lawyers, auditors - earn much of their income simply by verifying other people's results. Businesses developed checks and balances because other peoples' money was involved, not because businessmen are more virtuous than academics.
Back when paleoclimate research had little implication outside academic seminar rooms, the lack of any adequate control procedures probably didn't matter much. However, now that huge public policy decisions are based, at least in part, on such studies, sophisticated procedural controls need to be developed and imposed. Climate scientists cannot expect to be the beneficiaries of public money and to influence public policy without also accepting the responsibility of providing much more adequate disclosure and due diligence. [3]