Comments And Questions On The BEST Analyses

Update #2 –  In response to the comment on the weblog The Way Things Break in the post

Initial thoughts on the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature release where my perspective on the BEST research was misstated, I wrote

Regarding

“Roger Pielke Sr. was quick to attempt to downplay the BEST results by implying they were not independent of previous analyses. Perhaps Roger should have actually bothered to read the papers he was attacking”

I have not discredited the BEST study. I have raised issues that they have not covered in their papers; please see my post https://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/comments-and-questions-on-the-best-analyses/

Update: In terms of my view on the global average surface temperature trend as the tool to assess climate change (and thus the importance of the BEST analysis on this subject), please see my post

So-Called “Climate-Sensitivity” – A Dance On The Head Of A Pin

The BEST analysis is of scientific interest (e.g. it addresses one of the issues in our paper Pielke et al 2007), but it does not deserve the large overstated media response to it (e.g. see) 

——————————————-

I have posted comments that I have provided on Watts Up With That, Climate Etc and Blackboard (asking questions on their study, which, in my view, should be answered before the papers are accepted for publication) regarding the BEST Analysis as an Update to

Comment On The Article in the Economist On Rich Muller’s Data Analysis