Christy Once Again Misinforms Congress

The water level in Austin, Texas, Lake Travis is 45-feet below full

Christy Once Again Misinforms Congress
As always seems to be the case when climate contrarians are invited to speak to policymakers (or the public), John Christy has done nothing more than repeat a bunch of common and long-debunked climate myths.  Even worse, in doing so Christy referenced the unpublished and incomplete paper he has co-authored with Anthony Watts, which contains numerous fundamental errors that completely undermine its conclusions.  Despite these errors, and despite the fact that the paper has not been reviewed or even submitted to a journal, and despite it contradicting his own satellite measurements which he has held to be the gold standard, Christy presented those wrong conclusions to US Congress.

Unfortunately, one of the two main political parties in the USA only seems interested inpropagating climate myths rather than educating themselves about what the body of climate science research tells us.  And just as unfortunately, John Christy seems more than happy to provide them with the desired misinformation.  In fact, during the question and answer session, Christy refused to admit the simple reality that global warming is not a hoax, which makes it very difficult to take anything he says seriously.

Expert credibility in climate change: Who are the real experts and what do they think?

Russia, where 23 regions have declared a state of emergency due to drought.

 

ABSTRACT

Expert Credibility in Climate Change

William R. L. Anderegg
James W. Prall, Jacob Harold, and Stephen H. Schneider

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), April 9, 2010

Read the full article

Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field surveyed here support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.