from andrewsullivan.com

THE TIMES' ALASKA NUMBERS: I've done a quick perusal of the report cited by the New York Times in defense of a thirty year alleged annual mean temperature rise in Alaska of 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit. I can't find the number anywhere. The best I can do is the report's claim that "warming has been up to 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit per decade over the last three decades in the annual mean, with the largest warming occurring in the interior and arctic regions... Some Alaskan records show that a very large warming, of about 3 degrees Fahrenheit occurred suddenly around 1977 and has persisted since then." Alaska is enormous and the "up to" phrase refers to maximum variations in different regions - not average annual temperature for the whole region, as the Times slyly implies. But even taking the biggest number in the report - which is still not the average annual temperature - the maximum annual mean temperature increase in any region would still be 4.5 degrees - not 5.4. Did the Times get a case of dyslexia? The report is also quite clear that factors other than global warming are probably responsible for large amounts of the variation, whereas the Times has implied that all of the variation is due to global warming. The only temperature chart I can find in the report shows permafrost warming since 1970 to be at most 1 degree Fahrenheit (although the mean annual permafrost temperature in 1950 is the same as today, and was followed by a severe drop in temperatures in the 1950s as a whole). Then look at these far clearer numbers and you can see the obvious conclusion: the New York Times is still lying about climate change in Alaska. They can't even get their correction right.

-p (the NYT's agenda again supercedes facts)