Pat Michaels is one of the most prolific and widely quoted climate
change skeptics. He has frequently been called "Virginia's
state climatologist" although the State of Virginia recently told him
to stop using that title when conducting his private
consulting business. There is some controversy as to whether
or not he is a state climatologist. Michaels was originally
appointed state climatologist by the former Governor John Dalton in 1980.
However Katherine K. Hanley, the secretary of the
commonwealth, said the code of Virginia "does not provide for the
governor to appoint a state climatologist." According to the Daily Progress the current Governor Timothy M. Kaine’s office says
Michaels "holds an honorary position and does not speak for the state
or the governor" and he "is not subject to gubernatorial appointment -
or political removal from office."
Climate Model Scandal #1: (Mis)informing Congress:
The following is one of several reasons why numerous people refer to Pat Michaels as a "fraud, and simple". On June
23, 1988 James Hansen testified in front of congress on
global warming.
Hansen said he could state "with 99% confidence" that a
long-term warming trend was underway, and he strongly suspected that
the greenhouse effect was to blame. He provided the following graph as
part of his Congressional testimony on global warming:
Hansen's Original 1988 Graph
Hansen and Lebedeff,
1988
This graph showed 3 scenarios. Scenario A, B, and C were
based on different levels of CO2 output. Scenario A has a
fast growth
rate for greenhouse gases and fossil fuel use. Scenarios B and
C have a moderate growth rate for greenhouse gases. However scenarios C's growth would peak at the year 2000.
The objective was to illustrate the broad range of
possibilities of how CO2 forcings would actually
develop. It's simply too difficult to predict how much coal
humans will burn.
Fast forwarding 10 years, Hansen updated his graph with the
most recent temperature measurements. The temperature
measurements are in red. Hansen's predictions were very
accurate. The growth rate of greenhouse gases in the period
1988-1998
has been relatively linear, very similar to scenarios B and C (which
are nearly
the same until year 2000).1
However, when Pat Michaels testified in front of Congress he
erased scenarios B and C of Hansen's graph. Climate blogger Coby
Beck
claims Pat Michaels "lied by omission". Professor Tim Lambert prefers to use stronger words "fraud, pure and simple" on his blog. Nobody can know with
absolute certainty what is going on in anyone's mind.
However, the facts are that Pat Michaels not only
erased what Hansen stated would be the most likely scenario, but he had also erased the two
most accurate scenarios.
The Committe on
small business doesn't have online records prior to 2001. However, Pat
Michaels testimony is hosted at the CATO institute. For an analysis of how Hansen's graph is
performing using the most up to date info, please goto Professor
Rabbett's blog entry "Well
lookee that...."or visit Logical Science's analysis.
Pat Michaels Messes Up Basic Math and Declares Victory
In 2004 Patrick Michaels in the journal Climate Research. In a TCS Daily article "Settling
Global Warming Science" he wrote:
After four years of one of
the most rigorous peer reviews ever, Canadian Ross McKitrick and another of us
(Michaels) published a paper searching for "economic" signals in the
temperature record. McKitrick, an economist, was initially piqued by what
several climatologists had noted as a curiosity in both the U.N. and satellite
records: statistically speaking, the greater the GDP of a nation, the more it
warms. The research showed that somewhere around one-half of the warming in the
U.N. surface record was explained by economic factors, which can be changes in
land use, quality of instrumentation, or upkeep of records.
The problem with this paper which has undergone one of the "most
rigorous peer reviews ever" is that Patrick Michaels messed up some
really basic math. Patrick Michaels confused degrees with the much larger radians. If you understand highschool level trigonometry then you should be able to follow this tutorial and discover the blunder yourself. This error has been discussed in blogs by Prof. Tim Lambert, John Quiggin and the peer reviewed paper Benestad (2004).
In 2005 Michaels published an errata (CR 27, 265-268 ) which
admitted the mistake. Unfortunately, this is not the first time
that the peer review process at the journal Climate Research has failed. Oddly
enough, the other paper also attempted to cast doubt on anthropogenic global
warming. Both papers were reviewed by the controversial Chris de Frietas. The year before Pat Michaels' paper was published, the chief editor and 3 additional editors had resigned in protest because the "review process had utterly failed". Much more on this topic can be found at Realclimate here and here. Given the history of the journal and the fact that he botched up some basic math, Pat Michaels' statement of "four years of one of
the most rigorous peer reviews ever" is a little out of place.
The final sentence of the TCS Daily article says:
The
science is
settled. The "skeptics" -- the strange name applied to those whose work
shows the planet isn't coming to an end -- have won.
Since then National Academy of Sciences of
11 countries signed a statementsaying “Climate
Change is real” and we need "to
take prompt action to reduce the causes of climate change".
Naomi Oreskes has read the abstracts of every single one of the 928
scientific papers containing the words "global climate change" from
1993 to 2003. None of them disagreed the existence of human
driven climate change. For a complete rundown of the consensus please
go here.
Funding and Conflicts of Interest
In 1995 Harpers
Magazine author Ross Gelbspan reported that Pat Michaels has received
more than $115,000
from coal and energy interests. In 2006 a leaked memo
from the Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA)
details payments of at least $100,000 and the soliciting of more money
for Michaels et al from other coal outlets. Pat Michaels is
also a Visiting
Scientist with the George C. Marshall
Institute and a Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies with
the Cato Institute.
Both of which receive funding from Exxon Mobil and other oil
interests.
The Anonymous Climate Model
On realclimate.org Gavin Schmidt claims Pat Michaels twists
scientific evidence on his blog World Climate Report. Pat
Michaels claims uses specific areas of Southern Greenland to debunk the
climate models due to the lack of warming in that specific region.
The problem is that he doesn't specify which climate model he's
"debunking". To make matters even more confusing all the climate
models listed on the public database at
PCMDI do not predict warming in Southern Greenland. So one has to
wonder if Pat Michaels created a fake climate model just to debunk it.
Access to
the models is free and registration is merely a formality. Feel
free to analyze the models yourself and compare them to Pat
Michaels's claims.
Hansen,
J., and S. Lebedeff 1988. Global surface air temperatures: Update
through 1987. Geophys. Res. Lett. 15,
323-326.
If you would like to
contact us, suggest a topic to be covered, contribute a relevant
commentary,
or be part of this effort on a more permanent basis, please email: