http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/03/better-than-best.html

<a href = " http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/03/better-than-best.htmlIf the slope of the ensemble is still visible, the difficult problem of deconvoluting forced and unforced variation may be moot

> Round three, to distract
Those misstating the study, Limbaugh and Wingnut Daily are also worth considering because they are profitable advertising venues of the ilk discussed in Rick Perlstein’s “The Long Con” . He says: count on the advertisers to know where to find gullible, easily frightened people who are suckers for fake health and fake get rich scams. And those are the same places where the current wave of climate disinformation is also found. That’s their meat, that’s their desired audience.

They need to fool enough of those people, soon enough to affect the upcoming Paris climate peace talks. Look at the ads in the places carrying the disinformation stories, and read Perlstein’s piece about the cold hard cynicism of those who fleece that audience for their income.

If you don’t understand what I am talking about, after I provided an example, I don’t know how to make it clearer.

From the USCRN website:

“The vision of the USCRN program is to maintain a sustainable high-quality climate observation network that 50 years from now can with the highest degree of confidence answer the question: How has the climate of the Nation changed over the past 50 years?”

Well OK then, I guess we’re all set.

NOAA have set up a new network of climatic stations called the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN).

Australia has modified existing weather stations to form a new climatic network called ACORN-SAT.

New research projects at Antarctica and Greenland.

New satellites to gather climate-related data such as OCO2 and DSCOVR (probably others as well).

As far as I know the ARGO float program is progressing.

The IPCC has released it’s 2013 and is working on the next one.

NASA, NOAA and the US government have launched new websites that discuss and present climate change info for the layperson.

Lots of things happening.

Here’s an example.

http://www.popsci.com/drones-fly-over-melting-arctic-ice-science

Popular Science is the closest to mainstream I could find for that using google news search.

I mean, everybody loves a drone story, right? Not just people who read climate blogs, which is where I found out about this.

And the real point is, we need to do scientific work at this level of detail– that’s how we’ve always made progress figuring things out. I know there are people engaged in this, in the different areas I mentioned above, but it just gets buried by the supposed ‘controversy’. That, to some extent, is the fault of the scientific community in failing at ‘framing’, which, as Dean said, it has been bad at for a long time.

I don’t see reporting about efforts to improve the resolution of our data on specific phenomena that might have serious consequences.

That means putting more and better sensors to work monitoring polar ice and temperatures– where there are big holes– , or parts of the Pacific, where there are big holes, or characterizing all the parts of the AMOC, or TOA radiation, and so on.

If you can give me some links to reports like that on the evening news or the front page of NYT, I would appreciate it. It could be pictures of researchers placing buoys and sensors in challenging circumstances– always good video, or someone pounding the table at a congressional hearing.

But not another report on how the blogosphere is spinning a couple of papers that might or might not contradict each other, because the results are equivocal. (Which is normal in science, but this particular science is critical to human well-being, so that is not acceptable.)

If you want to get across that fact, and show people that you are doing something, you have to do things they can relate to.

Do you see where I am going now?