Carl Mears PhD is a senior scientist at the research firm Remote Sensing Systems, and a globally acknowledged expert in satellite based global temperature reconstructions.
He was interviewed in San Francisco, December 2015, a week after a widely publicized US Senate hearing, chaired by Senator Ted Cruz, in which the Senator purported to cite Dr. Mears data set in support of his climate change denial positions.
This is the first of several postings which will document Dr. Mears complete, minimally edited interview.
My long form “This is Not Cool” video describing the whole issue is below:
Carl Mears says clearly that his data represent the mid troposphere which is up to several kilometres high. So the data do NOT represent surface temperatures as many people, who have seen this specific cherry-picked graph in the video, might still believe. See ploy #2 in the graph below illustrated by Real Climate (The most popular deceptive climate graph):
http://www.realclimate.org/images//Watts_world_climate_widget1.jpg
I forgot to mention in my last post. Of course the original deceptive graph comes from Anthony Watts who runs the notorious wattsupwiththat blog.
I love it when a scientist calmly states facts and then tops it off with a beautiful little cherry of “he’s gloming onto one set of data to prove his story. . .” C’est magnifique. But out won’t see the light of day.
You beat me to it, Charles. Yes! I’m very surprised that Mears didn’t point out the most damning aspect of Cruz’s deceptions – the surface vs mid-troposphere. It is at the surface that the optical depth of greenhouse gases is the largest and where simple heat differential logic tells you the induced warming will be greatest. The fact that the stratosphere is cooling because of increased collisional excitation -> photon de-excitation of CO2 (CO2 is higher there too) and reduced upward IR, only makes the case stronger, that you would fully expect there to be less temperature trend visible in the mid troposphere (where no one lives except a few Everest climbers for a few days).
You misrepresent the data, the only warming which stopped in 2005 is the north polar all the rest are in decline or no warming. http://www.remss.com/research/climate
I love it when a scientist calmly states facts and then tops it off with a beautiful little cherry of “he’s gloming onto one set of data to prove his story. . .” C’est magnifique. But it won’t see the light of day.
http://www.remss.com/research/climate what facts was he stating? His own graft shows Cruz was correct, no warming in anything except the north polar and that stopped in 2005.
What his were used for, not what his facts meant. Those were the facts I factually factuated.
Actually the science guy is in a panic as Cruz is telling the public what the data shows http://www.remss.com/research/climate and that is contrary to the AGW religion which gets grants , power and prestige.
The global data shows no warming, the stratosphere data shows a decline, the tropics show a decline, the only data warming with no warming since 2005 is the arctic.
Back on that “grant” mythology? If you want real money, get the backing of the Koch Bros. like Dr. Soon did.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/us/ties-to-corporate-cash-for-climate-change-researcher-Wei-Hock-Soon.html?_r=0
Again, when you want to know the temperature outside, do you consult a thermometer or a satellite?
Yaaawwwnnnn. Tommy,give it a rest,willya?