Make up your mind Lubos

Not too long ago, climatic blogger Lubos Motl declared:

if done right, temperature adjustments are great

Lubos said people asking questions had an ‘adjustment-phobia’ that ‘unmask[ed] their anti-scientific credentials’. (He didn’t stop there, of course, calling the questioners ‘nutjobs’, deleting comments and retrospectively editing his words.)

Now, he writes a post questioning adjustments made by Karl et al 2015 in Science, the pause-destroying paper with the devastating conclusion that adding numbers to temperatures makes them go up.

The post is actually chock-full of sensible questions about the ‘hiatus-killer’, such as:

However, the shock is that the warming trend extracted from the marine vessels was copied to the buoys time series


The warming trend indicated by the buoys – a project that was specifically designed by scientists to measure the temperature of the ocean – was completely erased by Karl et al.


If you’re not dull, you will ask: Why didn’t they do just the opposite? They could have repaired the trend from the marine vessels for them to agree with the lower trend from the buoys

I think it is time to call Lubos Motl an anti-scientific nutjob.



  1. omanuel

    “Nothing in life is to be feared.
    It is only to be understood.”
    ~ Marie Curie

    Regretfully the 1945 Stalinization of worldwide science included the foundations of physics.

    An intriguing and extremely well-done video response to “The Great Social Experiment of 1945-2015″

    describes this same period of time as “The Long Peace of 1945-2015:”

    There is better option than

    _ a.) Worldwide nuclear war
    _ b.) Tyrannical world rule, or
    _ c.) Fear of nuclear energy

    “The Nuclear Scare Scam:”

    That option is ACCEPTANCE of reality: Our lives and our fate are determined, not by Stalin nor other political leaders, but by the pulsar at the core of the Sun that made our elements, birthed the solar system and sustained the origin and evolution of life!

  2. Brad Keyes


    I know what you’re getting at here, but the wording affords misunderstanding, I think:

    “I think it is time to call Lubos Motl an anti-scientific nutjob.”

    How about:

    “I think it is time for Lubos Motl to call himself an anti-scientific nutjob.” ?

  3. hunter

    I gave up on Lubos after he wrote about how he self-diagnosed himself with an obscure complication of a fatal disease and then later melted down over disagreement with his pro-Russian stance regarding the Ukraine.