Sad to see it come to this.

Comment left at The Science Show...

"Still waiting on Robyn to have a no nonsense, rational discussion with some of the major players about climate sensitivity and the growing disparity between climate models and observations. Might I suggest Pitman, England and Karoly versus Lindzen, Curry, and Pielke (Snr). It is growing increasingly obvious to anyone following the scientific discourse that the models are running on the hot side and it seems the called Luke Warmers are on the verge of being proven correct.

Unfortunately all we continue to hear from the Science show is personal smear, ridicule and abuse, and from non-scientist activists to boot.

It is truly sad to see such a great radio institution demean itself in such a way. But I guess when you are losing an argument it's all you have left."

science show thumbs its nose at the IPCC

Unchallenged comment on this week's program that featured an alarming story about Matsungan Island (off northern Bouganville):

"Given scientific sea level rise predictions on the order of 1 to 2m this century...."

1 to 2m? hang on....

Just what did the IPCC say in 2007?

Figure 10.33. Projections and uncertainties (5 to 95% ranges) of global average sea level rise and its components in 2090 to 2099 (relative to 1980 to 1999) for the six SRES marker scenarios. The projected sea level rise assumes that the part of the present-day ice sheet mass imbalance that is due to recent ice flow acceleration will persist unchanged. It does not include the contribution shown from scaled-up ice sheet discharge, which is an alternative possibility. It is also possible that the present imbalance might be transient, in which case the projected sea level rise is reduced by 0.02 m. It must be emphasized that we cannot assess the likelihood of any of these three alternatives, which are presented as illustrative. The state of understanding prevents a best estimate from being made.

What regional tide gauges say...

Still an improvement. Recall dear Robyn feels a rise of 100m is a real possibility...

Andrew Bolt: I ask you, Robyn, 100 metres in the next century...do you really think that?

Robyn Williams: It is possible, yes. The increase of melting that they've noticed in Greenland and the amount that we've seen from the western part of Antarctica, if those increases of three times the expected rate continue, it will be huge, but the question...

Andrew Bolt: I'm scared that you think that because the latest studies in Greenland suggest that little spurt of warming that you base some of this has stopped, and it just depresses me that someone like me, I come on...I haven't said anything here that's wild or anything, I get the grilling, but someone like Tim Flannery is treated like God and made Australian of the Year for saying the most absurd things that are laughed at, even by climatologists.

UPDATE The photo the ABC use to accompany their piece comes from a 2008 report put out by World vision. Readers may be familiar with the image that appears on page 54.The appearance of Ursus Bogus a sure sign of propaganda in action.

ursus bogus

Gergis Updates MIA

The Australian provide more detail on the withdrawal of the paper by Gergis et al trumpeted so loudly by the ABC.

Blog scrutiny forces reappraisal

... Mr McIntyre said: "If public policy is to be based on academic articles, the academics cannot claim intellectual property rights over their data but must permit close examination of their data." 

Link for more (sub required)

Meanwhile, the only indication we can find thus far on the ABC (after the story broke almost two weeks ago) is a brief mention buried in a transcript on The Science Show that fails to credit the work done by Climate Audit in exposing the errors. You will need to click the transcript link to read the following:

Editor's Note: Since this story was originally broadcast, errors have been identified in aspects of the data processing which may affect the results of this study. As a result, publication has been delayed and the research has been withdrawn from online publication. Professor David Karoly of the research team says the data will be recalculated, peer reviewed and published in due course.

This is simply not good enough! The ABC should be ashamed of the low standard of its coverage on this issue.

Worst radio interview ever?

We posted on The Science Show's woeful interview with Bob Ward earlier this week. Quadrant Online have now put up an essay on the issue by Tom Harris titled "ABC fails listeners" that is definitely worth reading.
It begins..."What’s the worst radio interview ever conducted on climate change? Could it be Australian? 

Maybe so. ABC radio’s Robyn Williams’ October 2, 2010 interview of UK-based public relations director Bob Ward is certainly a contender for the worldwide gold medal in the ‘worse ever’ category.  The interview, broadcast on the nationally prestigious Science Show, is so bad that listeners don’t need to actually know anything about climate science to spot the most obvious flaws. "

Read the rest at Quadrant Online

Update: See also comments at Bishop Hill: "Bob Ward's efforts to smear absolutely everyone who disagrees with his position on climate change continues apace, with a shameful attackon Bob Carter on ABC radio in Australia."