Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Long wrong Joe Bastardi cooks the books to smear NSIDC. Time for Accuweather to fire him.

Posted on  

"Long wrong Joe Bastardi cooks the books to smear NSIDC. Time for Accuweather to fire him."

Share:

google plus icon

National Snow & Ice Data Center explains Bastardi can’t read graphs and “is unclear as to how standardized anomalies are derived”

UPDATE:  Bastardi responded in the comments here.  He couldn’t bring himself to admit that his accusation of fraud against NSIDC was not merely completely unwarranted but totally inappropriate and in fact based in part on his simple misreading of a graph.  Finally, though, on Sunday afternoon, Accuweather took the post down and Bastardi admits in his new “Emily Litella” post his charge was baseless.

Note: Accuweather’s contact info is online here and below.

I suppose it is Accuweather’s business if they want to seriously undermine their credibility by employing arguably the worst professional long-range forecaster on Earth:  See Joe Bastardi asserts “The coming cooling of the planet overall will return it to where it was in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s.”

So what if Bastardi is a man who just makes crap up, like “The vast majority of the long-range private sector meteorologists can see what is coming down the road and agree with me”?  So what if Bastardi has now firmly established himself as the least informed, most anti-scientific meteorologist in the world (see here)?  So what if he can’t read a temperature anomaly map?

Why should, Accuweather, the self-proclaimed “World’s Weather Authority” care?  They are a private company and they can hire whomever they want and, Lord knows, make whatever wild claims they want about their supposed “authority.”

But Bastardi has now moved beyond the realm of bluster and bad forecasting.  His inability to read simple charts has combined with his endless quest to attack those whose data or analysis supports the well-established scientific understanding that humans are changing the climate and induced him to try to undermine the reputation of the nation’s leading Center for acquiring and analyzing ice data.  As long as Bastardi stays at Accuweather, they are endorsing his willful errors and anti-science smears — and they merit the name Inaccuweather.

Bastardi’s latest error-riddled smear-fest is posted directly on the Inaccuweather site with an innocuous headline, “Monday Morning Sea Ice/Global Temp report” but a libelous caption:

Is the US NSIDC cooking the ice books? Sure looks that way if one is looking at all sites.

Actually, it far more looks like Bastardi is cooking the books.  I videoed the video, fortunately, since Inaccuweather may return to science-based analysis sooner or later and take it down came to their senses and took it down following my posting this morning.

Bastardi challenges NSIDC:  “Maybe they can come up with the reason for why, you know, my eyes are seeing the wrong things here.”  Maybe a high school student could, but since he challenged them, I asked NSIDC to respond.  Scientist Julienne Stroeve wrote this:

One problem with Joe Bastardi’s comparison is that with the JAXA data  set he’s comparing to the 2006 line, not 2007.  In JAXA, this year is a bit below 2007 right now (though there’s some missing data).

It’s important to remember that different sites use different algorithms (methods to derive sea ice from the raw data), different cutoffs of concentration (15% vs 30%), and sometimes different sensors (SSM/I vs AMSR-E).  Studies that compare different algorithms have repeatedly found that differences between algorithms can be large.  Generally, the largest differences are found in summer, with differences of more than ± 20 %. In winter, differences between the different algorithms are usually less than ± 10 %. No single algorithm has been found to be clearly superior under all conditions. The differences between satellite-derived estimates of sea-ice extent and so-called ground-truth observations are of similar magnitude. Nevertheless, while the absolute differences between algorithms and between with non-passive-microwave data sets are relatively large, they are generally constant over time.

Hence, trends in sea-ice extent that are estimated from different algorithms agree much more closely than do the absolute values of extent. Hence, trend estimates  provide a rather high level of confidence in estimates of sea ice change and variability. In terms of absolute values, estimates of total sea-ice extent are more reliable than estimates of sea-ice area. For the former, a certain concentration threshold (often 15% ice cover) is defined, and the size of any grid cell covered by more ice than this threshold contributes fully to total sea-ice extent. For ice area, however, only the truly ice-covered fraction of each grid cell contributes, giving rise to higher uncertainty.

Finally, it seems Joe Bastardi is unclear as to how standardized anomalies are derived.  Standardized anomalies are not the same thing as anomalies, which is defined by the actual deviation from the mean (climatology for that day or month). A standardized anomaly is further divided by the climatological standard deviation for that day/month.  When seasonal variations are present within a set of data, it is often helpful to express the data in terms of standardized anomalies.  They generally provide more information about the magnitude of the anomalies because influences of dispersion have been removed.

Here is the JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) data (click to enlarge):

AMSR-E Sea Ice Extent

It’s pretty clear that the NSIDC data (click here) is fully consistent with JAXA for late November, if you can read a graph.  Yes JAXA has some missing data — I can hardly wait for Bastardi to spin some conspiracy out of that.

Bastardi should retract the video and apologize to NSIDC.  If he won’t, then he clearly is abusing his position at Accuweather to spread disinformation in order to undermine one of the world’s leading scientific institutions — an institution that, unlike Bastardi, is trying to provide accurate, independent information about what humans are doing to this planet.   In that case, InAccuWeather should retract the video and fire him.  Of course, if they do, I expect FoxNews will officially ire him as their ‘forecaster’.

If you want to share your views with Inaccuweather, the American Meteorological Society was kind enough to post the contact information for their distinguished Founder, Chairman, & President, Joel N. Myers:

814-235-8600
myersj@accuweather.com

Please keep it genuinely civil (unlike the laughable disingenuousness of Bastardi’s “let’s all just calm down” in the video after he just finished accusing  NSIDC of fraud!). I suspect/hope Myers is unaware of what Bastardi is doing.  But once he becomes aware, then I can’t see how he could knowingly allow Bastardi to keep spreading anti-science disinformation with the specific goal of undermining the scientific institutions that are trying to inform the public about what humans are doing to the cryosphere.

UPDATE:  Bastardi responds in the comments here.  He just can’t bring himself to admit that his accusation of fraud against NSIDC was not merely completely unwarranted but totally inappropriate and in fact based in part on his simple misreading of a graph:

NSIDC contacted me on this, I posted on this explaining the situation and saying I believe they are above board. The Monday morning ( Dec 6th) sea ice report will make sure they are treated as the honest brokers they are. The explanation in on the site I do on the free site at accuweather.com and the Dec 6th video will explain why they are seemingly lower. For the record, I am not the only one that has questioned why they always seemed lower but they took the time out to contact me, and in detail, explain it. and now they have an advocate for their site, whether my forecast agrees or disagrees with them in the longer term. That is a matter for debate, which I happen to advocate.

Contrary to the way you portray me, I simply believe given what I see that the earth will cool back, using objective satellite observations, back to levels we saw in the late 70s, and the ice will increase back to those levels in the N hemisphere, and FALL in the southern hemisphere where overall it has increased. Its a simple debate and one we can objectively judge. And for the record, I am all for developing other ways to get and use energy . In fact if I am right, we will need it faster than if we warmed.

In spite of the harsh treatment you give me and others that believe as I do, I do believe that you are concerned for the betterment of man, and I wish you all the best
JB

Seriously.  Bastardi harshly accuses one of our premier scientific institutions of fraud based on nothing more than his own inability to read graphs and his unscientific conviction that the climate is about to start cooling again the 1970s level, and I call him out for it, and he comes here to whine about “harsh treatment” (but not apologize to NSIDC).  Boo-hoo.

For the record, the nameless others who have question NSIDC are the anti-science disinformers of WattsUpWithThat, a widely discredited website that Bastardi continues to tout on his new non-apology up on InAccuweather, “Monday Global Sea Ice Report ( A day early).”  I have no idea what Bastardi is “concerned” with. I only know that if any significant number of people keeps believing his anti-scientific nonsense, it will lead to the reverse of the betterment of man that science has helped deliver.

You’ll note that in the new video, he still tries to defend his original libelously wrong claim, and he still can’t bring himself to admit that he utterly misread the JAXA graph — and he refuses to click on the expanded JAXA image that is much easier to read.  He waits until the very end to admit that, in regards his charge of “cooking the books,” well, “There’s nothing to that.”

In short, like Emily Litella, “never mind!”  I will address Bastardi’s claim (at 3:30 in the new video) that Arctic sea ice is “leveling off” — and will turn the other way! — in a later post.

You can find more examples of Bastardi’s disinformation here:

« »

62 Responses to Long wrong Joe Bastardi cooks the books to smear NSIDC. Time for Accuweather to fire him.

  1. Mike Roddy says:

    You don’t have to listen to Bastardi very long before you realize what an absolute weirdo he is. This sells on TV, which is in the entertainment business. Someone wrote recently that his local weather forecaster’s previous job was playing a bimbo on a Spanish TV soap opera. And we all know about Anthony Watts. Accuweather, if only because of its title, should show more than a casual interest in the truth here.

    I’m curious to find out if Bastardi’s bosses are aware of his dishonesty and incompetence. We’ll know soon, when we see the response (or non response) from Joel Meyers.

  2. Bastardi apparently can’t read a graph. The low ice values for November on the JAXA graph are for 2006. JAXA’s 2007 curve looks like NSIDC’s curve, where this year is lower than 2007.

    This isn’t the first time a right winger has attacked the NSIDC messengers. All the data sets show long-term collapse of Arctic sea ice levels so the deniers attack the messengers to create uncertainty and doubt in the message.

  3. Mike says:

    Bastardi said “I’m not professing to be an expert …” (4:02-4:04).

    So why is he on the air? Why doesn’t Accuweather replace Bastardi with an expert? But the real clincher is this. He purports to be a journalist. A journalist’s job is to contact sources and ask questions. Joe Romm showed that this is not hard to do. Why didn’t Bastardi make even a minimal effort to do his job?

  4. I think it is not uncommon for people to distrust experts in favor of folks they think are using common sense to interpret what they’re seeing.
    There might be a larger percentage of people afraid to fly in this group. They need to feel in control.

    Crock of the Week posted an incredibly embarrassing video of my representative (Rohrabaucher – I vote against him but I’m behind the Orange Curtain) arguing with Dr Ally
    http://climatecrocks.com/2010/12/02/rohrbacher-and-alley-bluster-vs-brain/

    The timing of Rohrabaucher’s interruptions is suspicious.

  5. Truly unbelievable. Thanks for the contact information.

    Sent:

    Dear Mr. Meyers,

    As a Ph.D. scientist, I have long been concerned by the way in which Joe Bastardi at Accuweather presents and interprets data related to global climate change. For instance, he has previously used figures created by Christopher Monckton that falsely claim to represent temperature “predictions” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see here: http://www.fool-me-once.com/2010/09/temperatures-are-below-projections.html).

    However, his recent accusation that the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) is “cooking the books” is astonishing. Mr. Bastardi claims that the NSIDC shows current sea Ice below 2007 levels whereas other datasets show it above. I couldn’t believe me eyes and kept saying, “but that’s 2006, not 2007!” Mr. Bastardi did not even bother to check which year the lines of the graph correspond to before making his accusation to a television audience. This is an accusation of scientific fraud – which scientists don’t take lightly – and it is entirely baseless and rests on an astonishing lack of professionalism and rigor. This is not science and it is not accurate.

    I would certainly hope that accuracy is still valued at Accuweather. By continuing to allow Joe Bastardi to present his unsubstantiated and false claims, Accuweather is not living up to its namesake. Joe Bastardi should make a formal apology on the air to the NSIDC and/or be relieved of his duties as Senior Meteorologist. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he is not up to the task of his title.

    Sincerely,
    Dr. Alden B. Griffith

  6. John McCormick says:

    What an absolute bonehead.

    I tuned into the video. It was shocking that a professional?? would put up such a mashed presentation. If he pays dues to the American Meteorological Society, the AMS should return his check and drop him from its mailing list. Was he sober?

    John McCormick

  7. caerbannog says:

    Reminds me of that old Married with Children episode “Rain Girl”, where Kelly Bundy gets a gig as a tv “meteorologist”.

    Selected excerpts of the episode are viewable here (after you sit through a commercial): http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcg2ac_married-with-children-minisode-rain_shortfilms. (Skip about 3 minutes into the video to see Kelly Bundy in full “Joe Bastardi” mode.)

  8. whoops – not very good accuracy on my part with the spelling of Mr. Myers’ name…

  9. paulm says:

    He should have a chat with his mate and take some advice….

    Stu Ostro – The Weather Channel’s Former Skeptic
    http://climatecrocks.com/2010/12/03/stu-ostro-the-weather-channels-former-skeptic/

  10. Peter M says:

    In the current political environment we are currently in, the far right through their various propaganda mouthpieces have a large audience of misinformed people who listen to Fox news- as well as Bastardi- they have millions who take what they say as the ‘truth’.

    When the political winds shift- as well as the climate- Bastardi may have to look for new employment.

  11. The Wonderer says:

    If you’re hoping to grab the attention of the senior person at Accuweather, I humbly suggest you simplify the message, tailored to someone with whom you probably have 60 seconds or less. Putting myself into their shoes, I don’t think

    - It’s important that different sites use different algorithms
    - Trends agree more than absolute values between different algorithms
    - He is unclear on how standard anomolies are derived

    are the major points you’re trying to make. Also, although he was clearly seething with sarcasm, he stated “maybe someone can explain this to me” enough, that someone might judge that having him acknowledge it was explained to him and that he was mistaken would be the appropriate response.

    I do not disagree with you at all, I’m just saying, messaging, messaging, messaging, and don’t overplay your hand.

  12. Chris Winter says:

    You wouldn’t need to do more than look at that video to suspect something. The repeated cries of “What’s going on here?”, accompanied by presentation of portions of different graphs for which we have to take his word on what they represent, are marks of a charlatan.

  13. Joe Bastardi says:

    NSIDC contacted me on this, I posted on this explaining the situation and
    saying I believe they are above board. The Monday morning ( Dec 6th)
    sea ice report will make sure they are treated as the honest brokers they are. The explanation in on the site I do on the free site at accuweather.com and the Dec 6th video will explain why they are seemingly lower. For the record, I am not the only one that has questioned why they always seemed lower but they took the time out to contact me, and in detail, explain it. and now they have an advocate for their site, whether my forecast agrees or disagrees with them in the longer term. That is a matter for debate, which I happen to advocate.

    [JR: Your original post accusing them of fraud based on your big mistake is still up. NSIDC is owed an apology and you should admit your obvious mistake and retract the post asap.]

    Contrary to the way you portray me, I simply believe given what I see that the earth will cool back, using objective satellite observations, back to levels we saw in the late 70s, and the ice will increase back to those levels in the N hemisphere, and FALL in the southern hemisphere where overall it has increased. Its a simple debate and one we can objectively judge. And for the record, I am all for developing other ways to get and use energy . In fact if I am right, we will need it faster than if we warmed.

    In spite of the harsh treatment you give me and others that believe as I do, I do believe that you are concerned for the betterment of man, and I wish you all the best
    JB

    JR: You accused the NSIDC of scientific fraud. That is ‘harsh’! I have no idea what you are concerned with. I only know that if any significant number of people believe your anti-scientific nonsense, it will lead to the reverse of the betterment of man that science has helped deliver.

  14. BBHY says:

    You could give him the benefit of the doubt and say this is just an honest mistake, but if he could have taken it up privately with the NSIDC instead of publicly, and he didn’t have to use the phrase “cooking the data”.

    Since this is part of a demonstrated ongoing pattern, I say fire him.

  15. Peter M says:

    I visited the Univ of Colorado site -The National Snow, Ice Data Center throughout the summer and late summer to see ice extent- and content in the high arctic- their site is excellent- it amazes me that the climate change deniers would ‘burn the books’ of such an organization- but in fascism…………..

  16. JoeB,
    Your repeated habit of shooting first and asking questions later is a disgrace to the profession and deserves what you perceive to be harsh treatment.

  17. dhogaza says:

    For the record, I am not the only one that has questioned why they always seemed lower but they took the time out to contact me, and in detail, explain it

    Joe Bastardi … it is *your job* to contact them *before* accusing them of fraud, rather than accuse then thank them for “taking time time to contact me”.

    Tch, tch.

  18. MapleLeaf says:

    Fire him. His “eye-balled” yellow trend line for the global sea ice data anomalies is flat (from the “Cryosphere today” site) .

    Tamino has done some rigorous statistical analysis on this. A proper statistical analysis of the Arctic and Antarctic NSIDC sea ice data shows that the trend in global ice area coverage is down. What is more, the decrease in global sea ice is accelerating, with a second order polynomial providing a much better fit than the linear fit.

    Bastardi is misleading people on so many levels. Time for him to go.

  19. BBHY says:

    “I simply believe given what I see that the earth will cool back, using objective satellite observations, back to levels we saw in the late 70s, and the ice will increase back to those levels in the N hemisphere, and FALL in the southern hemisphere where overall it has increased. Its a simple debate and one we can objectively judge. ”

    Would love to hear what actual evidence there is to support that.

    “what I see…” and ‘objective satellite observations” don’t really do much to explain why anyone would have such a viewpoint. I suppose the explanation includes a reason how and why CO2 will suddenly reverse the basic physical property of absorbing infrared heat radiation? The same property that CO2 has consistently shown for 200 years without the slightest shadow of doubt?

    I don’t see how anyone could seriously predict future cooling with steadily increasing absorption of heat energy within the atmosphere. That’s why I call them deniers. In my opinion, they can be upgraded to skeptics only when they can explain how increasing heat absorption does not cause warming. Good luck with that.

  20. toby says:

    Joe (Bastardi),

    A real reporter, interested in pursuing the truth, seeks clarification BEFORE he/ she shoots his/ her mouth off in public.

    This is a serious lap in professionalism on your part and shows poor judgment. I suspect you were thinking more of the expected plaudits in the denialosphere rather than your responsibility to report what was really happening.

  21. paulm says:

    Joe B, you seem to be genuinely concerned about the good of society. Why dont you do your research first, contact the data owners etc before you spout off on the climate topic.

    Have you considered the consequences if the world really does warm to 4C? (and it probably easily will) It just seems very blasé not to approach this cautiously, considering the possible outcomes.

    It really is very worth will have a chat also with risk management professionals to get an idea about how we should be handling this issue.

    Would you fly on a plane you knew had a more than likely chance (50%?, 60%?, 80%?) of falling out the sky?
    I think you must admit that the current weather extreme events linked to warming are an ominous sign of whats to come, not in 100yrs but in the next 5-20yrs.

    Please take time to discusse this with someone you might trust like….Stu Ostro, senior Meteorologist at the Weather Channel and some of your colleagues at accuweather like…Brett Anderson who seems now recognize the seriousness of the dilema we are in.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwMrpRdHjkQ&feature=player_embedded

    http://www.accuweather.com/global-warming.asp

  22. Mike Roddy says:

    Thanks for showing up here, Mr. Bastardi, but…

    Your presentation has been shown to be inaccurate, a view confirmed by
    NSDIC’s Julienne Stroeve above, including misrepresenting the years cited. We are interested in your specific and detailed responses to the data distortion issues raised by both Joe Romm and Ms. Stroeve.

    It is apparent to us that you were mistaken, and this is not the first time this has occurred. Admitting to the series of errors in your most recent video presentation may prove more protective of your career than the vague response you have submitted so far.

  23. MapleLeaf says:

    From AccuWeather’s site:

    “AccuWeather Values
    To achieve AccuWeather’s mission, we require great people with great values. AccuWeather seeks to recruit, develop and retain people who are intelligent, innovative, and entrepreneurial, who take pride in their work, and who passionately share AccuWeather’s values:
    * Respect, honesty and trust
    * Commitment and responsibility
    * Collaboration and communication
    * Quality and accuracy
    * Service to internal and external customers
    * Efficiency, productivity and achievement”

    Bastardi has frequently violated at least three of AccuWeather’s core values. Either AccuWeather need to change their core values or they need to fire Basatrdi.

  24. Colorado Bob says:

    a nation of screw drivers with plenty of loose screws……….

  25. Colorado Bob says:

    Subarctic wildfires a ‘runaway climate change’ risk

    By Marlowe Hood (AFP) – 3 hours ago

    PARIS — Global warming is driving forest fires in northern latitudes to burn more frequently and fiercely, contributing to the threat of runaway climate change, according to a study released Sunday.

    Increased intensity of fires in Alaska’s vast interior over the last decade has changed the region from a sink to a source of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas most responsible for heating up the planet, the study found.

    On balance, in other words, boreal forests in the northern hemisphere may now soak up less of the heat-trapping gas than they give off.

    The bulk of the released CO2 comes not from the burning trees, but from what is in the ground.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iHzV4Rnedlsw6RBBnzPrz4OZou3g?docId=CNG.7936abe2aac85ef50ca11a2d6b6c031b.381

  26. Xela says:

    Bastardi also compared the sea ice extent graph from NSIDC with Arctic Roos sea ice area. The graph in the upper left.
    http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic Two different things!
    Now is Bastardis new video up on inaccuweather! ;)

  27. Accuweather has a simple task – defining the future of their business.

    Let’s see, the insurance industry plots their actuarial risk based on climate and weather analysis – I am pretty sure they do not get it from Accuweather. Airline industry pilots, they have their own weather resources. Farmers and commodity investors, they too have their own information sources – and I am pretty sure it is not Accuwhether.

    Accuweather seems to be deliberately reducing viewership by pandering to audiences that want fantasy weather.

    Fantasy Weather – what a concept.

  28. Mike says:

    Mr. Bastardi,

    You seem like a very polite person. That is refreshing in these debates. But, may I ask, why did you not contact NSIDC? If you are not an expert, why not seek out expert opinions?

  29. Fred Teal Jr. says:

    Check out this link to a segment of Fareed Zacharia’s program today on global disasters in 2010. He does conclude, to use a Tom Freeman term, that it looks like “global weirding”.

    http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/12/05/gps.what.world.disasters.cnn

  30. Bob Wallace says:

    Joe Bastardi – a simple question (or two).

    Do you believe that weather/climate has physical causes or do you believe that weather/climate change in some random fashion?

    If physical causes, then…

    If you believe that physical causes underlie the changes that we have observed in climate warming to date what upcoming events do you see driving “the earth will cool back, using objective satellite observations, back to levels we saw in the late 70s, and the ice will increase back to those levels in the N hemisphere”?

    Your turkey cools off if you 1) turn off the stove, 2) open the oven door, or 3) take it out of the oven. What change in earth rotation, sun strength, greenhouse gas levels, volcanic action, or whatever is going to cool our collective turkey?

  31. Michael says:

    I think that it would be nice if the NSIDC showed not just the year with the record low absolute minimum, but also record lows at all times of the year, since of course 2007 only had record lows for a period around July-October. This would also avoid a lot of remarks of record low ice extent when they are comparing it to 2007, an error that I have seen most recently when it went below 2007 – but still above 2006, which they don’t show (and hopefully reduce errors like Bastardi made).

  32. Wit's End says:

    Wow. I read all of the post and all of the comments, and then watched the video. I had never seen Joe Bastardi before because I don’t watch the teevee. What a revelation.

    That was the most incoherent, rambling, pointless word salad I have encountered since the last time I heard Sarah Palin interviewed. He gets PAID for that?

    So, unlike Joe Bastardi who can’t be bothered to look things up when he doesn’t “get it”, I looked up “rambling speech” and have good news! Joe B., I think there may be help for you – depending on the source. According to the site linked to below, it could be one of the following:

    [snip]

    http://www.healthline.com/symptomsearch?addterm=Rambling%20Speech

    Good luck to you, Joe. I hope you have a good long-term disability plan with Accuweather, looks like you’re going to need it.

  33. OregonStream says:

    JB, the Antarctic sea ice growth is apparently related to a confluence of regional factors unrelated to overall cooling, so not sure how that’s relevant, or what you’re basing your long-term outlook on. This is ultimately about climatology, not regional meteorology, so you’d need some reviewed scientific evidence for a negative global climate forcing. Otherwise, it might look like you’re just grasping for anything that might support your beliefs/presumptions.

  34. MapleLeaf says:

    Wit’s end @31,

    I agree with you about the “rambling speech”. But surely the rest is not necessary…

    Bastardi is incoherent on the science etc., so lots to justifiably critique on that front.

    So can we please check the ad homs at the door?

  35. Have to side with WitsEnd #31 on this one… while personal snark is generally uncalled for — anyone who performs for the masses is calling for a response….. Bastardi’s product is his image and personality – not a scientific paper or research… he may even like the controversy – since even the ad hom attacks spread his name around. Same with Sarah Palin (Momma Moose Killer) and Rush Limbaugh (Big Fat Idiot)

    In a perfect civilization we would just not speak their names at all, but if their faces and voices and rants are assaulting my consciousness without my consent, then they are open season.

  36. Wit's End says:

    Well, MapleLeaf, the truth is, I googled “rambling speech” out of pure curiosity, and that’s what came up. It surprised me – but it’s simply a fact.

    And, Joe B. and his ilk, those who share his dangerous, denialist mania whether out of ignorance, ideology, or for profit, are threatening my children with a horrible fate.

    No words can express my fury and outrage that he has a pubic forum to condemn my kids to a very unpleasant future and an even more unpleasant demise.

  37. Mike says:

    I agree with MapleLeaf #32. However, on the video Bastardi does seem to be a rambling angry man, yet his letter (#13) is polite and professional. This leads me to hypothesize that his rants are an act. That is, he is playing a roll for entertainment proposes.

  38. catman306 says:

    Surely, in this economy, there are out of work TV weather people that could quickly replace AccuWeather Joe. Many of these people will be experts and have integrity. I’d expect that a lot of resumes will be headed in AccuWeather’s direction.

    Those resumes should be closely studied. Bastardi needs replacement.

    Fantasy Weather is not sustainable.

  39. MapleLeaf says:

    Wit’s End @33,

    “No words can express my fury and outrage that he has a pubic forum to condemn my kids to a very unpleasant future and an even more unpleasant demise.”

    I don’t disagree. But, we are not WUWT, Curry or Monckton et al. As difficult as it is (and trust me, I know it is incredibly difficult!)we have to take them down while keeping the moral high ground.

    I do agree with Mike @34, that this is probably an act by Bastardi– AccuWeather seems to have become Fox’s version of weather TV, with Bastardi a wanna be Limbaugh.

    And if it is an act, then that makes Bastardi’s actions all the more despicable.

    [JR: Bastardi as Glenn Beck? Except Accuweather ain't FoxNews.]

  40. Per Mike @36: The difference, as you note, between Mr. Bastardi’s video screed and his note here impresses me as something more along the lines of total disconnect. Mr. Bastardi’s note @13 betrays no cognizance of any kind of the aggressive, accusatory presentation in his video. I am personally at a loss to come up with anything which could, by even the wildest stretch of the imagination, qualify as a charitable explanation for such total denial.

    In addition, the violation of basic rules of critical thinking that Mr. Bastardi displays in that note — the unattributed appeal to “many people,” which is a blatant argumentum ad populum AND argumentum ad vericundiam — does not in any way encourage me in thinking that Mr. Bastardi is operating with even marginal competence WRT to the ideas he is so very variously expressing.

  41. Wit's End says:

    Well, on the humorous note, I hasten to add that some of us Romm’n’Legions are intermittently aware that the pubic isn’t the equivalent to the public, just minus an “L”…

    nor is the role in #37 meant to imply any sort of roll…

    but perhaps the aforementioned demonstration in front of the White House could include a pubic roll…no, no, I mean…a public role…

    where are my reading glasses?

  42. S. Molnar says:

    Joe, I think you’re missing the point: Bastardi is doing exactly what his boss wants. Don’t forget that the boss is buddies with Rick Santorum.

  43. GFW says:

    Joe B. wrote
    “I simply believe given what I see that the earth will cool back, using objective satellite observations, back to levels we saw in the late 70s”

    Do you have a physical basis for this belief? If so, please tell us what it is?

    AGW has a very strong physical basis – the well known radiative properties of CO2. So your physical basis needs to explain how the earth will have a negative radiation balance (to cool down) even as CO2 concentrations continue to rise.

  44. Icarus says:

    toby gets right to the heart of it when he says here (of Joe Bastardi):

    I suspect you were thinking more of the expected plaudits in the denialosphere rather than your responsibility to report what was really happening.

  45. GFW says:

    Ah, my post is completely redundant given Bob Wallace’s – which I hadn’t yet seen.

  46. dhogaza says:

    Don’t forget that the boss is buddies with Rick Santorum.

    Who once introduced a bill that would’ve put an end to the NWS’s free forecasting services in order to boost profits of for-profit weather forecasting companies, such as the one owned by Santorum’s buddy, Accuweather.

  47. Jerry says:

    Spoke with someone who lives near State College PA, where Inaccuweather is HQ’ed. He says Myers is known locally for his promiscuity and a string of failed marriages. Walk in the lobby of their HQ and you’ll see photos hanging of Myers shaking hands with Ronald Reagan, Bush Sr, and Bush Jr. Myers has had ties to the energy business and financial sector. Staunch and loyal Republican. My guess is that Bastardi is doing exactly what he was hired to do.

  48. Neven says:

    Don’t be so hard on Bastardi. I want him to be WUWT’s special reporter next melting season.

    To be fair, he was the only pseudo-skeptic who forecasted the last minimum extent to probably be below 2009. This has given him some standing amongst the hoi polloi, which is very attractive to Anthony ‘PR trumps truth’ Watts. Who else is going to do next summer’s Arctic sea ice cherry picking, with Steven Goddard out of the picture and everything, after he made a total fool of himself last melting season? I think it should be Bastardi, so cut him some slack.

    Of course he should just apologize to NSIDC for his jumping to conclusions based on the Dunning-Kruger version of colour blindness and I’m sure he will. When you don’t understand something it can mean that somebody committed fraud. More often it is because you haven’t thought things through enough yet, or you simply lack the knowledge and capacities to judge accurately.

    It’s a very useful lesson I had to learn myself as well.

  49. Neven says:

    Ah well, not exactly an apology in his new vid, but it certainly was more balanced (especially after min. 3) and he retracted his ‘cooking the books’ allegation a couple of times. Well done, Joe B!

    Oh, and I wasn’t sure which channel that UAH AMSU-A graph was, but you should use ch05!

  50. Ray says:

    Rather than asking Accuweather to fire Bastardi, which will just feed the persecution fantasies of the denialists, we should urge Accuweather to have a knowledgeable NSIDC scientist come on the air with Bastardi and go over the facts. High risk, but if they have someone truly knowledgeable who can keep his or her cool, he’ll be shown for the jerk that he is.

  51. Bob Wallace says:

    Say, Joe B – it’s been a few hours since a couple of us asked you the basis for your predictions of a cooling planet. Now I’ve no doubt you saw the questions, but we’ve heard nothing.

    Are you some sort of weather ‘chartist’ like those stock market guys who seem to believe that market prices have a life or their own and follow behavioral rules like a cockroach? You know the type – “Once we’ve bounced off the bottom three times things will start back up”.

    Or do you believe in some sort of ‘warming dragon’ who comes out of his cave periodically, warms things up for a few decades, and then goes back to sleep? If so, do you think it would help if we set off firecrackers and beat gongs to drive him away or would it be better to sing him lullabies?

    Gosh, I sure would like to know the thought process of someone whose job it is to forecast the weather and must have been exposed to the idea that a warming planet is going to create more extreme weather. Seems like anyone with just a little bit of intellectual curiosity would have looked for a factual basis, but perhaps not…..

  52. Richard Brenne says:

    Either God or someone slightly less omnipotent at Ellis Island sure got Bastardi’s name right.

    Politeness in a comment does not undo incompetence and/or willfully lying on TV.

    To see how often it has open water, I suggest Bastardi either stop the incompetent and/or deceitful attacks, or tread water at the North Pole for a year. . .

  53. Mike says:

    @Wit’s End #41.

    ROTFL

  54. Andy says:

    As someone who depends upon absolutely accurate weather forecasting, I believe Accuweather does a poor job of forecasting. The National Weather Service is much, much better. I can see them as a company that provides broadcasts of forecasts or interpretations, but they pretty much bite when it comes to generating them. One of our TV stations uses Accuweather’s model and they are usually overforecasting rain chances and getting the timing of fronts wrong.

    Weather Underground is an example of a private group that uses NWS computer forecasts to generate weather synopsis; but they don’t try to come up with their own models.

  55. Andy says:

    Now that I’m thinking about it:

    Accuweather is used on the same stations that broadcast Rush Limbaugh and his cadre of look and sound alikes.

    I guess they are one more piece of the alternate reality these anarchists/libertarians seem to crave.

  56. A face in the clouds says:

    Mr. Bastardi serves a purpose, because somewhere alien societies may be watching and listening to broadcast signals from Earth. One of these societies may some day decide to conquer Earth. If they have been watching or listening to Mr. Bastardi they will come armed only with pea shooters, and we will destroy them.

  57. Greg says:

    Whats amusing is when he looks at the Danish site plot which shows the 2010 line being equal with the second lowest on record, but in Bastardi’s tiny tiny mind this translates into “pretty close to middle of the pack” – how on gods green earth does the second lowest value on record translate to “middle of the pack”?! perhaps by the fact that it didn’t make the record!

    and yet when 2010 did set a huge new record in Jun did he point it out?

  58. Susan Anderson says:

    Some ancient history. Accuweather was outed as having supported Rick Santorum (2002) in return for being given favors over the federal weather service, a lot of business. A few years back I tried to find more, but couldn’t.

    Before its blog redesign (seems an imitation of Wunderground), superb Brett Anderson (no relation) who does the Climate Change blog, was overwhelmed with a large group of deniers who barely let anyone else get a word in edgewise. Although I have a certain amount of appetite for the fight, it got so disgusting I finally relocated over at DotEarth.

    However, the Climate Change blog at AW continues to be a great source of information, and Brett is a fine intelligent meteorologist.

  59. Neven says:

    It’s too bad Bastardi doesn’t openly admit his error and apologizes to NSIDC. He just goes: “They have contacted me (mind you, he never contacted them), explained the whole thing and no, they are not cooking the books”. He at least repeats that a few times, which is the most that can be expected from a pseudo-skeptic, I guess.

  60. MarkB says:

    The main purpose of accusing scientists and scientific institutions of fraud is to get attention from them and from others, and it works. Bastardi, who has no expertise in climate science, has plenty of drooling fans who love his stuff. Getting the cult fired up gets them singing in unison, and often draws a response from the targets they are intending to antagonize, which is a considered a victory for them.

    So Bastardi claims he just wants open debate. What better way to foster open debate than to slander those you are trying to debate? Never mind that scientists will usually respond to honest questions via email (although not doing so is not evidence of a conspiracy), without the fraud accusation and theatrics. I asked NOAA about a graph once and got a timely and thorough response. Bottom line: Fox News would have no use for Bastardi if he conducted himself in a respectable manner.

  61. Bob Doublin says:

    #59″no,they are not cooking the books” Nowadays we have to look at everything as the equivalent of “They’re no longer beating their wives.”

    #57 “pretty close to middle of the pack” It’s like the teabagger dork on Alternet who claimed to “conclusively refute” global warming because hurricane seasons were becoming less intense over the last 3-5 years-this on the night the Weather Channel said 2010 was tied for 6th alltime active since 1850 and there were subsequently 3 more storms to tie the season for THIRD out of 160. You had to have been there.The irony was fraught.;-)

  62. Mark at the Rally says:

    Bob Doublin (#61), in the denialists’ minds, hurricanes only “count” if they hit the USA.