Josh Willis’s research is central to the issue of global warming, as it is the ocean heat content that needs to be monitored. Climate Science has weblogged on this quite a few times; e.g. see
Comparison of Model and Observations Of Upper Ocean Heat Content
New Information From Josh Willis On Upper Ocean Heat Content
Can The IPCC Model Projections Of Global Warming Be Evaluated From Just Several Years Of Data?
Thus is quite surprising and puzzling that Josh ignores his data and focuses on the global surface temperature trends in his JPL weblog It’s a Sure Bet - by Josh Willis. He ignores the variety of major issues associated with this data set; e.g. see
Pielke Sr., R.A., C. Davey, D. Niyogi, S. Fall, J. Steinweg-Woods, K. Hubbard, X. Lin, M. Cai, Y.-K. Lim, H. Li, J. Nielsen-Gammon, K. Gallo, R. Hale, R. Mahmood, S. Foster, R.T. McNider, and P. Blanken, 2007: Unresolved issues with the assessment of multi-decadal global land surface temperature trends. J. Geophys. Res., 112, D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229
including demonstrated significant warm biases.
He is quoted by DotEarth by
“Dr. Willis says those who grasp at short-term wiggles in ocean or atmospheric conditions as evidence of global warming or cooling are like gamblers seduced by a hot streak into thinking they can beat the house.”
His analog to gambling only fits in that he is gambling on a set of data of which he is not working on, and ignores the importance of his own accomplishments which show no upper ocean warming since mid-2004. This is hardly a wiggle!
The more appropriate analog is to a bank account. Joules must continue to be accumulated in order for global warming to occur. In the last 4 years there has been an absence of deposits. To make up for this deficit in the next 4 years, for example, the accumulation of Joules must be double the rate that occurred in the 1990s. Josh Willis is gambling, but it is in accepting the models as reality.