Is anybody reading Real Climate any longer?
the difference between 1998 and 2010 is in the hundredths of a degree, and most of the attribution work on recent climate changes is looking at longer term trends, not year to year variability. However, there is now consistency across the data sets that 2005 and 2010 likely topped 1998 as the warmest years in the instrumental record
Compare that now to Skeptical Science, April 18, 2012 “First Look at HadCRUT4” by dana1981:
In HadCRUT4, the hottest years on record are 2010 and 2005, with 1998 right behind in a statistical tie.
From the quotes above, it is difficult to ascertain if Gavin Schmidt has any understanding of the meaning of a difference “in the hundredths of a degree” (hint: for all scientific intents and purposes, it’s a difference of zero). The point that “there is now consistency across the data sets” seems to indicate an obsession with numbers and a forgetfulness of the underlying physical aspects of climate.
Even Dana Nuccitelli, amid the usually flurry of anti-skeptic rants and dubious interpretations passed as Truth, appears to have a better grasp on science itself.
Note that among the scarce number of comments (83), a couple of people try to make this simple point, only to be told by the likes of tamino that it doesn’t matter because of evil skeptics of course. As if surgeons would regularly use subpar anaesthesia justifying themselves by saying there are evil doctors out there doing far worse.