Editorial: ?Hansen is simply wrong? and ?his hypothesis is a complete and abject failure?

Source:  WattsUp

Hansen Arrested at Protest

UPDATE: 9:55 AM  PDT 8/8/12 A graph of Palmer Drought Severity Index -vs- GISTEMP data has been added from Dr. Michaels. Looks like another ?GISS miss?.

There?s a lot of blowback against James Hansen?s recent (non tested) PNAS paper, trying to link weather and climate, covered here on WUWT. Even NOAA scientist Dr. Martin Hoerling is panning it. This from The NYT:

Dr. Hoerling contended that Dr. Hansen?s new paper confuses drought, caused primarily by a lack of rainfall, with heat waves.

?This isn?t a serious science paper,? Dr. Hoerling said. ?It?s mainly about perception, as indicated by the paper?s title. Perception is not a science.?

Here?s a short editorial by Dr. Pat Michaels, former Virginia State Climatologist:

Hansen is simply wrong.

Hansen claims that global warming is associated with increased drought in the US. This is a testable hypothesis which he chose not to test, and, because PNAS isn?t truly peer-reviewed for Members like him, no one tested it for him.

I have [examined] drought data [that] are from NCDC, and the temperature record is Hansen?s own. His hypothesis is a complete and abject failure.

[UPDATE: Graph added 9:55AM PDT 8/8/12:]

Scatterplot graph of U.S. Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) -vs- NASA GISS  temperature data. If there was a correlation between temperature and droughts in the USA, the dots would align along a line from upper left to lower right (or mirrored LL to UR, depending on the correlation). But, as the plot shows, there is no correlation between drought & temperature of any kind.

It is hard for me to believe that Hansen did not know this, and yet he went ahead with his paper. This must be true because Hansen has published papers on the Palmer Drought Index and future warming. Administrator Bolden is obligated to investigate the ethics of publishing a paper that the Director of the GISS laboratory knew could not pass the most simple test of hypothesis.

The following excerpt from his PNAS paper tells you everything you need to know about James Hansen?s paper:

?Although we were motivated in this research by an objective to expose effects of human-made global warming as soon as possible??

– Dr. Patrick Michaels, via email


On the same day of one of NASA?s proudest achievements, the landing of the rover Curiosity on Mars, Dr. James Hansen and PNAS went on a media blitz to push a paper that is so technically flawed, that if it were a spacecraft, it would surely have burned up in the atmosphere due to a faulty understanding of that atmosphere. Unfortunately, as Dr. Michaels points out, it was never tested and Dr. Hoerling points out that it ?isn?t science, but perception?. NASA used to deal in facts and testing, because if they didn?t, people died. Now NASA?s image has been tarnished on the day of one of its greatest triumphs by a rogue scientist with unsupportable ideas and a global media megaphone.

I have in the past, called for Dr. Hansen?s firing after his arrest episodes where he acts as  an activist and protestor. I repeat that call today and will continue to do so. NASA administrator Bolden, fire Dr. James Hansen. He is an embarrassment to NASA, and an embarrassment to science. Show him the door.

Many of your greatest engineers, scientists, and astronauts agree that Dr. Hansen has overstepped his bounds with his advocacy, as I repost below. ? Anthony