AGW Climate Change Omniclimate Policy Science Skepticism

Wolfgang! Wolfgang! What Have You Done?!

Here’s some commented text from paper 1 at pages 1 and 2 of issue 1 of Remote Sensing, Feb 20, 2009…yes, of course an editorial by brown-nosed Professor-with-little-to-teach Doctor-with-nowhere-to-guide-to Wolfgang Wagner, introducing the new journal with “A Better Understanding of Our Earth through Remote Sensing” (PDF):

We are so accustomed to seeing satellite pictures of the earth that it seems as if there is nothing left to be discovered. […] Yet, does this truly mean that all the secrets of the earth have now been disclosed? Can we extract all the information we need from existing earth observation data?

No we can’t. Why? Because of people like you, Wolfgang, trying to remove credibility from those that do use “existing earth observation data” and spending their time sending apologies to the ones who pretend “there is nothing left to be discovered“.

[…] we have now more open questions and needs for environmental monitoring capabilities than ever before […]

No we don’t. See above. How did you dare mention “open questions” a few months before Copenhagen?

[…] What is the mass balance of glaciers and how strongly does their melting contribute to sea level rise? Are sea surface temperatures rising and will we experience more hurricanes and tropical storms as a result of that? Can we measure subtle changes in sea surface salinity and how do they affect ocean circulation?[…]

Say what? So, in 2009 you did ask questions like a climate skeptic. Wow. Impressive.

[…] These and many more question can only be answered by combining remote sensing and geophysical modeling capabilities in a process-oriented framework.

Process-oriented, uh? As in, by establishing processes that do not depend on the whims and egos of the people involved. What a dream. Too bad it died around 30 months later, when your “framework” stopped caring about the “process“.

The scope of the new journal Remote Sensing is to publish regular research papers, reviews, letters and communications covering all aspects of the remote sensing process, from instrument design and signal processing to the retrieval of geophysical parameters and their application in geosciences. Remote sensing is understood in broad terms, encompassing a wide range of sensors that acquire data about the Earth and its environment, and other physical objects and processes […]

Now this is important. You know, following your resignation people have started saying the nastiest things about Remote Sensing, a minor journal of no interest for climate science. People who? People like the person you apologised to, dear Wolfgang.

[…] Remote sensing is a highly interdisciplinary field where electrical engineers, physicists, mathematicians, computer scientists, and surveyors meet with their colleagues from photogrammetry, GIS, and the various geosciences[…]

They meet, alright, then what? You try to ostracize some of them, uh? Do they have to listen to a recording of all RealClimate posts in Vogon language?

Is that what a meeting of minds should be about?

[…] Due to the confounding influence of other natural parameters it may for example not be possible to achieve an unambiguous interpretation of the remotely sensed data. The limited number of independent measurements may also mean that an exact solution is unattainable or at least impracticable […]

So if you KNEW all of this in Feb 2009, what made you throw it away in Sep 2011? On which date exactly did your mind lose coherence (or you evil cousin took over)?

[…] The scientific challenge is to develop retrieval algorithms that describe the physical measurement process in sufficient detail, yet be simple enough in order to allow a robust inversion of the remotely sensed signals […]

Are you sure your newly-found friend Gleick would agree? Actually, do YOU agree with that statement and if so how can you, now?

[…] My personal wish is that Remote Sensing will stimulate the exchange of scientists from around the world […]

And yet, when you have seen your wish granted you ran away. What have you done, Wolfgang? Do you realize, from yesterday onwards, each and every paper published on Remote Sensing will be greeted by a question: “What does Kevin Trenberth think about it?”.

It’ll be better and more sincere for MDPI to add a little note to every contribution: “I’m Kevin Trenberth and I approve this paper“.


ps in his introductory editorial, Wolfgang mentions “climate change” twice, “global carbon balance” once. Of the seven rhetorical questions he poses, six can be traced to climate change. I don’t know what one should think, but the importance of “climate change” for Wolfgang and Remote Sensing is self-evident.

0 replies on “Wolfgang! Wolfgang! What Have You Done?!”

my considered thoughts…this paper by Spencer was very popular – did it get downloaded 56000 times or some such figure? This nwould have givben the publishers a massive revenue and profit boost. Therefore they probably asked Wolfgang to please publish more papers by Spencer. Wolfgang could get away with publishing one poor paper by Spencer – to help improve Trenberth’s very intolerant public image (see, it is possible to publish sceptic papers in the “peer-reviewed” litchurchur) but the prospect of being forced to publish a stream of them for commercial reasons forced him to apologise to the capo.

Congratulations on revealing the workings of modern science so clearly, to you and to Robert Phelan and Les Johnson. Don’t be too hard on Wagner. His services to science are greater than he could imagine.

Omn, he’s done much more than just that! Imagine if Wolfy hadn’t resigned, if he’d quietly worked to refute S&B? I doubt then, the op-ed piece would have been written at least in the manner it was. The advertisement of Dressler’s paper wouldn’t have been so visible. The anticipation of Dressler’s paper wouldn’t have been palpable. The quick dismantling of Dressler’s paper wouldn’t have been so quick, nor so complete. GRL, peer-review, and Dressler may have been able to retain some credibility. I don’t think this will easily pass, but, I’ve been wrong about this before…….

I saw this post on Bre Rabbit’s site…it made no sense to me

are you able to shed any light? I remember reading Virgil, Gongora and Mallarme but this meant nothing to me. I caqn recognise the words but when they nare pout together like this, I cannot grasp the sense. I would ask the question on the site, but everybody there would call me a denier or child-abuser or something.

Question 2: wot has become of the three feckless, careless, totally irresponsible reviewers?

Question 3: is it too late to send out a SWAT team with forensic backup?

wow! both this and his valediction are just pure gibberish? “allow a robust inversion of the remotely sensed signals […]”

and Trenberth, Stoat (taking science and all people with independent thought processes by the throat), Halpern (who prefers to be referred to in the 3rd person as if he were a rabbit otr some kind of God), Shewonk and all think that his resignation says something meaningful….he wants a new job, pure and simple.

Leave a Reply to geoffchambers Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.