Richard Mueller, professor of physics at University of California at Berkeley, was one of those scientists, who called climate research proving the Earth is warming due to human activity–the result of shoddy science and “political activist frenzy.”
After Mueller’s team set out to prove the evidence was wrong on global warming, the resulting research released last week ended up supporting the evidence instead–much to the chagrin of a Republican lead Congressional panel that called him to testify last month, in the hopes of putting the kibosh on the climate debate.
Professor Mueller and his team studied land temperatures, where they thought research irregularities would confirm their “alarmist” theory. It’s important to note that ocean temperatures, where warming has occurred the most, was not part of the study. But they investigated five times as many land temperature readings as other researchers.
“We discovered that about one-third of the world’s temperature stations have recorded cooling temperatures, and about two-thirds have recorded warming. The two-to-one ratio reflects global warming. The changes at the locations that showed warming were typically between 1-2ºC, much greater than the IPCC’s average of 0.64ºC.”
Mueller’s research showed temperatures in the past five decades have been dramatic, abrupt and massive. It was consistent with previous models and studies done by other climate scientists that concluded greenhouse gases have been directly attributed to the burning of fossil fuels by humans. Mueller had to admit that other scientists had been “careful and honorable in their work.”
The notion that other research was biased and exaggerated, because it was being conducted primarily from urban locations that tend to retain more heat, was proven wrong by Mueller:
“In fact, opposite in sign to that expected if the urban heat island effect was adding anomalous warming to the record. The small size, and its negative sign, supports the key conclusion of prior groups that urban warming, does not unduly bias estimates of recent global temperature change.”
Moreover, during the summer, when called before a congressional panel that has been vocally skeptical of climate research, Mueller acknowledged that his team had not found any “smoking gun” that could be used to debunk global warming or to indict climate scientists on charges of swindle and fraud.
According to a recent report, Mueller told the House Science Committee that the work of the three principal groups that have analyzed the temperature trends underlying climate science was “excellent …. We see a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups.”
Only the sound of crickets has been heard from anti-science politicians and deniers, as a result of Mueller’s research. They are the ones promoting inexcusable ignorance and complacency on the devastating consequences of a very real threat to humanity.
Professor Richard Mueller, to his credit, is no longer a part of that divisive monolith.
Mueller reports his findings here.