Richard Allan says: September 20, 2011 at 9:27 am
I was surprised that this paper was mis-interpreted as suggesting negative cloud feedback. This is a basic error by the author of the post that has been highlighted by many contributors including Roy Spencer.
REPLY: Dr. Allan, thank you for visiting and for your correction. Please note that I’ve made an update to the post, removing the word negative from the headline and including why I interpreted the paper to demonstrate a negative feedback for clouds. I welcome your thoughts. It seems to me that if clouds had a positive feedback, the dips in 1998 and 2010 in your figure 7 would be peaks rather than deep valleys.
Bishop Hill and the skeptical cookbook
Posted on September 20, 2011 by Anthony Watts
Oh this is fun, Bishop Hill catches John Cook’s “Skeptical Science” in a revisionism gaffe using The Wayback Machine.
And of course the factual post converted to a "learning" exercise:
Its snowing CO2 in the antarctic!!
My post on Curry point out that watts and his ilk have been demanding peer review by blog. They get it with Best ... and then complain bitterly about Best pre-publishing - you just cannot win!
Climate Change Refugees: Where Will They Go?
2 hours ago