Skip to content

Roger Pielke Jr Trashes Latest Junk Science On US Floods

January 13, 2021
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

 

If you want any more evidence that climate science is utterly corrupt, take a look at this latest junk, which Roger Pielke Jr has just trashed:

 

 image

https://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/1349015417449275395?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1349015417449275395%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.climatedepot.com%2F2021%2F01%2F12%2Fdr-roger-pielke-jr-on-flood-damage-good-news-long-term-trend-1940-2019-is-sharply-down-as-a-proportion-of-us-gdp%2F

In fact, just look at the 1988-2017 segment again, and you will notice that the slight upward trend is solely due to the outlying year of 2005, which you will of course recall was the year of Katrina. The flooding of New Orleans was principally due to the failure of the levees and the fact that the city lies below sea level, and therefore tells up zip all about climate trends.

Indeed, without Katrina, the trend is clearly downwards.

The paper also includes this chart:

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2017524118

So it’s been getting wetter in the US since 1928. But this is hardly surprising, given that severe droughts were widespread and long lasting in the 1930s and 50s. Increased rainfall is, in other words, a good thing on the whole, and it does not automatically follow that flooding is worse as a result.

 

But climate scientists are not interested in an objective analysis of the facts. They merely want to keep the climate gravy train rolling:

image

 image

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2017524118#abstract-2

5 Comments leave one →
  1. Gerry, England permalink
    January 13, 2021 10:35 am

    How much longer before Dr Pielke is censored by Twitter for saying what they don’t like given the current climate of silencing those not on message. Pleased to see Twitter shares crashed 12% the other day. The sooner we can move to alternatives not run by the left-wing elite the better.

    • January 13, 2021 12:12 pm

      Well said. I agree although I have never been on Twitter. Same for Facebook, YouTube and the rest.

    • Mack permalink
      January 13, 2021 12:48 pm

      Indeed Gerry, although I think censorship will be the least of his worries when the Green Pharisees really get to work under a Biden administration. How long before the first ‘climate contrarian’ show trials I wonder?

      • Broadlands permalink
        January 13, 2021 3:04 pm

        “On Sept. 1, twenty professors and climate scientists wrote a letter to Barack Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and science czar John Holdren praising their regulatory assault on fossil fuels. That wasn’t the point of the letter, however. The disgruntled authors encouraged a more crushing strategy the White House should use to speed up compliance to Obama’s climate change agenda. The group stated, “We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress.” But… “One additional tool — recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse — is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.”

        In other words, why not just prosecute and imprison those darn skeptics getting in the way?

  2. January 16, 2021 6:42 pm

    Regarding those regression lines: I don’t know how they were calculated, but they look very much unsuited to the job at hand. For the 1988-2017 one we have an outlier in 2005 with very high leverage. This pulls the mean up by its bootstraps. It also affects the slope markedly depending on where it is relative to the centre of the observations. (If you put a large weight on the middle of a see-saw it has no effect on the angle, but if you put the same weight close to either end, it does.)

    1988 to 2017 is 30 years. 2005 is the 18th year from the beginning of the series, so it is still pulling the slope up a tad. When it reaches the middle of the series – i.e. after a further 6 years of data collection – it will no longer affect the slope, which will probably be flat unless there is another Katrina. In subsequent years it will push the trend down.

    There are approaches that use the median, rather than the mean, that might be more resilient to outliers like that (I’m not familiar with them alas).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: