A lot of mainstream reporters are highly skeptical of any reason, other than politics, to pay a lot of attention to so-called scientific findings that come from the contrarian-skeptical-denier-whateveryoucallit wing of climate change policy discussion. But one should not let the label deter fair treatment of journal articles on the topic.
John Christy, a climatologists (not meteorologist as earlier version of this post had it) and atmospheric science researcher, is Alabama’s state climatologist and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He, with colleague Roy Spencer, for years published studies saying satellite data show no global warming in the troposphere. That conclusion has since been persuasively shown to result from an artifact in the instrumentation. But Christy remains among the top stars of the small, but insistent, contrarian science corps.
Last week the university had a release saying he has done a novel data analysis of California’s Sierra snow fall (this week, thank goodness, the mountains are getting hammered after a very dry early and mid-winter). Data gathered by Southern Pacific Railroad crews since the 19th century, which he laboriously punched into a data base while staring at reams of non-digitized records, revealed no long-term trend. Many hydrologists and climatologists have predicted, and might have thought they’d see by now, a declining trend in snowpack.
The picture of Christy – a fine and friendly fellow when the press calls and even if most science writers think he’s not made a case against global warming -sitting there poring through the old data, working hard rather than just spouting off like some other contrarians with PhDs I could name, is intriguing and sort of touching
So far, however, hardly anybody much has written this story up. Those that do mention Christy’s skepticism, and that’s fully apropriate. There is some reported opinion from others that say the new analysis has some holes in it (the RR-men measured depth rather than water content, the work was done by untrained amateurs, there may have been drift in the locations where they stuck measuring sticks, other analyses to see signs of a decline, etc).
*UPDATE: Christy, in an email to the tracker, tells us that his study measured snowfall, not just depth, and that the workers who made the measurements were well-trained and not amateurs. He also says the UAH satellite data set, while requiring some correction a few years ago, indicated a warming trend in the lower atmosphere dating to 1997-98.
But a whole new historic data set is interesting and must have some merit,. There is little reason to assume that just because the globe is warming California should be getting less snow on a distinct trend, already. All our weather comes straight off the Pacific. Ocean temperature is heavily buffered (ie, it’s a huge heat sink) against temperature change, high water content and more snow could easily counteract warmer temperatures and earlier melt inland. The report even if eventually vindicated is no game changer. But it could be opportunity for a longer, closer look at the nature of science, and of labels, by somebody in the journalism business.
Stories:
- SF Chronicle (Feb. 21) via Davis Enterprise – Peter Fimrite: Sierra snowfall consistent voer 130 years, study shows ;
- Tahoe Daily Tribune – Dylan Silver, Adam Jensen: Snow depth in the Sierra Nevada has changed little in more than 100 years, according to new study ;
Grist for the Mill (via Newswise) University of Alabama Press Release ; Journal of Hydrometeorology abstract: Searching for Information in 133 years of California snowfall observations ;
– Charlie Petit
Leave a Reply