In reading Dr. Michaels’ blog I was unable to verify the claims he made with data that didn’t come from Dr. Michaels. He claims his main chart (the one Monte likes so much) came from data published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. He cites this publication as his source. I suggest everyone go and try to read through that source first and see if you come up with the same conclusion he did. I could not find the data that he says is the source for this chart. Maybe it is there. The whole report is 104 Mbytes, so I suppose it is possible. But anyone critically reading Michaels’ blog would want to check that out before taking his word for it.
But let’s move on and assume that the data is correct. What does the chart show? It shows data in the tropics only. Not only that, it shows data for the upper atmosphere only. And of course it includes only measurement you can get with balloons or satellites - no surface temperatures. Looking at the graph it appears that the satellite measurements have been re-analyzed to show less warming. Hmm… You mean the raw data has been tinkered with? “Adjusted?” Wow! And I thought that was the exclusive domain of the alarmists who are always adjusting surface temperature to show more warming. To be clear, I don’t really object to proper re-analysis of instrumental data, and I have no reason to think this re-analysis is corrupt in any way. But let’s just remember this lesson the next time someone cries “Climategate!”
So we have a chart that shows how the models predicted the upper atmosphere over the tropics to have seven times more warming than satellite and balloon readings gave. Michaels goes to claim (without proof) that these projections and actual readings are “key” to the whole theory - that an inaccuracy in this narrow area throws serious doubt over the validity of the model predictions for overall average global temperature. I would like to see that claim supported by data from a friendly, or at least unbiased, source.
I eagerly await the enlightenment from my skeptical friends here on these questions.