France record temperature.....more fakery!!

[Taz]

There are tons of papers on the subject. Going from sea level measurements. To ice core data. To simple temperature measurements. Just one example. Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997 Natural variations don't account for the rapidity of the changes. Natural variations can be traced. Solar activity, volcanic activity, earth rotation around its axis nothing fits the current changes. Except that is one.... human activity.
See science does measure quantify and look for evidence. The way I see it simply denying without providing a decent hypothesis to explain the data is faith.
You will find not a SINGLE climatologist or Oceanoligist who denies climate change and you will find few if any, in any other branch of science. What do you think it means that climate change denying finds no credible champions among those that actually research it?

Climate change is real. Human effect on it is still unproven.

Actually, since the onset of the industrial revolution, we've changed the composition of our atmosphere quite a bit.

Actually...no we haven't...recently I have posted at least 8 published studies which find that our effect on the total atmospheric CO2 is vanishingly small...you "know" that we have changed the composition of the atmosphere like you "know" that the emperors new clothes are simply lovely...it is a fiction. The fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the year to year variations in the earth's own CO2 making machinery.

People who believe that we are adding a great deal of CO2 to the atmosphere are most always suffering from a lack of perspective and scale... A single cup of water is nothing to us, but a disaster of epic proportions to an ant colony. From the perspective of an individual, the amount of CO2 we produce must seem enormous....but alas, to the atmosphere, the amount of CO2 we produce is barely noticeable... Here, perhaps this will assist you in developing some sense of the scale involved...

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Wrong again....

View attachment 267546

Your source has no factual content... Above is empirical evidence that calls bull shit on your modeled source.

"ever recorded", not ever in time. See the difference?

 

[forkup]

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

So do you have any particular problem with either the data or the methodology? Or do you just not like who did the study? If there are problems with either the data or the methodology, by all means point them out...if you just don't like the people who did the study, then once again..you have nothing.

I'm not a scientist. Neither do I claim to be. So asking me to find flaws in this thing is like asking your plumber to do brain surgery and then using the fact that he can't as proof that it's impossible. Having said that. Yes, I personally have a problem with the methodology. Since I know from my high school science class that part of the scientific method involves REVIEW. He didn't subject himself to it. Come to think of it why doesn't that breach so obvious that a layman can easily catch it doesn't bother someone who can find people who post stuff on a blog trying to invalidate climate change?
As to the data itself. Luckily I have the internet and I know how to use it.
We Fact-Checked a Bogus "Study" on Global Temperature That's Misleading Readers
This is someone who actually HAS a Ph.D. debunking it.

 

[SSDD]

Actually...no we haven't...recently I have posted at least 8 published studies which find that our effect on the total atmospheric CO2 is vanishingly small...you "know" that we have changed the composition of the atmosphere like you "know" that the emperors new clothes are simply lovely...it is a fiction. The fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the year to year variations in the earth's own CO2 making machinery.

People who believe that we are adding a great deal of CO2 to the atmosphere are most always suffering from a lack of perspective and scale... A single cup of water is nothing to us, but a disaster of epic proportions to an ant colony. From the perspective of an individual, the amount of CO2 we produce must seem enormous....but alas, to the atmosphere, the amount of CO2 we produce is barely noticeable... Here, perhaps this will assist you in developing some sense of the scale involved...

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Sorry guy...it wasn't...which leads into the fakery involved in the surface temperature record...the fact is that the earth has not yet warmed up to the average temperature that existed at the onset of the little ice age. All this gnashing of teeth over the "hottest evah" temperatures is nothing more than a response to data tampering which result in an apparent temperature that is 1/100th of a degree over the previous year...

It is pure unadulterated bullshit...do you really believe anything like a real average temperature can be derived when at present, on average there is one data collection station for every 10,000 square miles and a large percentage of those are in urban areas measuring a heat island effect...and all this happening on a planet whose daily maximum and minimum temperatures span 200 degrees?..and then on top of that, the "hottest evah" temperatures are expressed in terms of anomalies of a very short time span rather than being given in actual temperatures?

Are you really unable to see the sheer absurdity of believing anything such a record might provide?

I just gave you proof.

You appear to be deranged mentally. Sorry, I can't help you. I wish I could.

An opinion piece from a liberal newspaper constitutes proof in your mind? Little wonder you have been duped... It is always interesting to see what passes for proof in the minds of people who have bought into pseudoscience....or any other scam for that matter....thanks fo the insight.

No, they are reporting on what a European satellite agency found. See how that works?

I just provided you with the satellite records....they don't jibe with what the newspaper said..which is par for the course...it is a sad state of affairs when supposedly educated people refer to newspapers for scientific data.

 

[Weatherman2020]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

Put a few more weather stations in parking lots and the average temperature will be even higher!

No, I'm saying that no matter where you put it, if it records its highest temp ever, that can mean something.

How many weather stations were located in parking lots in 1930?

 

[SSDD]

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

So do you have any particular problem with either the data or the methodology? Or do you just not like who did the study? If there are problems with either the data or the methodology, by all means point them out...if you just don't like the people who did the study, then once again..you have nothing.

I'm not a scientist. Neither do I claim to be. So asking me to find flaws in this thing is like asking your plumber to do brain surgery and then using the fact that he can't as proof that it's impossible. Having said that. Yes, I personally have a problem with the methodology. Since I know from my high school science class that part of the scientific method involves REVIEW. He didn't subject himself to it. Come to think of it why doesn't that breach so obvious that a layman can easily catch it doesn't bother someone who can find people who post stuff on a blog trying to invalidate climate change?
As to the data itself. Luckily I have the internet and I know how to use it.
We Fact-Checked a Bogus "Study" on Global Temperature That's Misleading Readers
This is someone who actually HAS a Ph.D. debunking it.

So you are saying that you have no idea whether the basis of your own position is correct or not...you simply chose a side, probably based on your politics..but not based on whether or not the science actually supported the story being told.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Climate change is real. Human effect on it is still unproven.

Actually, since the onset of the industrial revolution, we've changed the composition of our atmosphere quite a bit.

Actually...no we haven't...recently I have posted at least 8 published studies which find that our effect on the total atmospheric CO2 is vanishingly small...you "know" that we have changed the composition of the atmosphere like you "know" that the emperors new clothes are simply lovely...it is a fiction. The fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the year to year variations in the earth's own CO2 making machinery.

People who believe that we are adding a great deal of CO2 to the atmosphere are most always suffering from a lack of perspective and scale... A single cup of water is nothing to us, but a disaster of epic proportions to an ant colony. From the perspective of an individual, the amount of CO2 we produce must seem enormous....but alas, to the atmosphere, the amount of CO2 we produce is barely noticeable... Here, perhaps this will assist you in developing some sense of the scale involved...

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Wrong again....

View attachment 267546

Your source has no factual content... Above is empirical evidence that calls bull shit on your modeled source.

"ever recorded", not ever in time. See the difference?

So your source is what, 35 years in length? And the earth is 4.5 billion years old...

If you can not see the lunacy in your claim, I cant help you...

 

[Billy_Bob]

I just put the radiosonds data against the articles claim and found they are 3.2 deg C higher than empirical measurements...

 

[Taz]

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Sorry guy...it wasn't...which leads into the fakery involved in the surface temperature record...the fact is that the earth has not yet warmed up to the average temperature that existed at the onset of the little ice age. All this gnashing of teeth over the "hottest evah" temperatures is nothing more than a response to data tampering which result in an apparent temperature that is 1/100th of a degree over the previous year...

It is pure unadulterated bullshit...do you really believe anything like a real average temperature can be derived when at present, on average there is one data collection station for every 10,000 square miles and a large percentage of those are in urban areas measuring a heat island effect...and all this happening on a planet whose daily maximum and minimum temperatures span 200 degrees?..and then on top of that, the "hottest evah" temperatures are expressed in terms of anomalies of a very short time span rather than being given in actual temperatures?

Are you really unable to see the sheer absurdity of believing anything such a record might provide?

I just gave you proof.

You appear to be deranged mentally. Sorry, I can't help you. I wish I could.

An opinion piece from a liberal newspaper constitutes proof in your mind? Little wonder you have been duped... It is always interesting to see what passes for proof in the minds of people who have bought into pseudoscience....or any other scam for that matter....thanks fo the insight.

No, they are reporting on what a European satellite agency found. See how that works?

I just provided you with the satellite records....they don't jibe with what the newspaper said..which is par for the course...it is a sad state of affairs when supposedly educated people refer to newspapers for scientific data.

I trust real scientists over some loon ranting on the internet. Better luck next time.

 

[Taz]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

Put a few more weather stations in parking lots and the average temperature will be even higher!

No, I'm saying that no matter where you put it, if it records its highest temp ever, that can mean something.

How many weather stations were located in parking lots in 1930?

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

 

[Weatherman2020]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

Put a few more weather stations in parking lots and the average temperature will be even higher!

No, I'm saying that no matter where you put it, if it records its highest temp ever, that can mean something.

How many weather stations were located in parking lots in 1930?

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Let’s put more weather stations in parking lots and make next year hotter.

 

[Taz]

Actually, since the onset of the industrial revolution, we've changed the composition of our atmosphere quite a bit.

Actually...no we haven't...recently I have posted at least 8 published studies which find that our effect on the total atmospheric CO2 is vanishingly small...you "know" that we have changed the composition of the atmosphere like you "know" that the emperors new clothes are simply lovely...it is a fiction. The fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the year to year variations in the earth's own CO2 making machinery.

People who believe that we are adding a great deal of CO2 to the atmosphere are most always suffering from a lack of perspective and scale... A single cup of water is nothing to us, but a disaster of epic proportions to an ant colony. From the perspective of an individual, the amount of CO2 we produce must seem enormous....but alas, to the atmosphere, the amount of CO2 we produce is barely noticeable... Here, perhaps this will assist you in developing some sense of the scale involved...

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Wrong again....

View attachment 267546

Your source has no factual content... Above is empirical evidence that calls bull shit on your modeled source.

"ever recorded", not ever in time. See the difference?

So your source is what, 35 years in length? And the earth is 4.5 billion years old...

If you can not see the lunacy in your claim, I cant help you...

Again, they aren't claiming hottest "ever", but rather since that sort of thing has been recorded. Geez, did I fall into some dumbass rabbit hole?

 

[Taz]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

Put a few more weather stations in parking lots and the average temperature will be even higher!

No, I'm saying that no matter where you put it, if it records its highest temp ever, that can mean something.

How many weather stations were located in parking lots in 1930?

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Let’s put more weather stations in parking lots and make next year hotter.

Your concession is duly noted.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Actually...no we haven't...recently I have posted at least 8 published studies which find that our effect on the total atmospheric CO2 is vanishingly small...you "know" that we have changed the composition of the atmosphere like you "know" that the emperors new clothes are simply lovely...it is a fiction. The fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the year to year variations in the earth's own CO2 making machinery.

People who believe that we are adding a great deal of CO2 to the atmosphere are most always suffering from a lack of perspective and scale... A single cup of water is nothing to us, but a disaster of epic proportions to an ant colony. From the perspective of an individual, the amount of CO2 we produce must seem enormous....but alas, to the atmosphere, the amount of CO2 we produce is barely noticeable... Here, perhaps this will assist you in developing some sense of the scale involved...

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Wrong again....

View attachment 267546

Your source has no factual content... Above is empirical evidence that calls bull shit on your modeled source.

"ever recorded", not ever in time. See the difference?

So your source is what, 35 years in length? And the earth is 4.5 billion years old...

If you can not see the lunacy in your claim, I cant help you...

Again, they aren't claiming hottest "ever", but rather since that sort of thing has been recorded. Geez, did I fall into some dumbass rabbit hole?

Millions are saved then since cold is the primary killer in weather related deaths.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Put a few more weather stations in parking lots and the average temperature will be even higher!

No, I'm saying that no matter where you put it, if it records its highest temp ever, that can mean something.

How many weather stations were located in parking lots in 1930?

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Let’s put more weather stations in parking lots and make next year hotter.

Your concession is duly noted.

Call me when palm trees return to Alaska.

 

[forkup]

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

So do you have any particular problem with either the data or the methodology? Or do you just not like who did the study? If there are problems with either the data or the methodology, by all means point them out...if you just don't like the people who did the study, then once again..you have nothing.

I'm not a scientist. Neither do I claim to be. So asking me to find flaws in this thing is like asking your plumber to do brain surgery and then using the fact that he can't as proof that it's impossible. Having said that. Yes, I personally have a problem with the methodology. Since I know from my high school science class that part of the scientific method involves REVIEW. He didn't subject himself to it. Come to think of it why doesn't that breach so obvious that a layman can easily catch it doesn't bother someone who can find people who post stuff on a blog trying to invalidate climate change?
As to the data itself. Luckily I have the internet and I know how to use it.
We Fact-Checked a Bogus "Study" on Global Temperature That's Misleading Readers
This is someone who actually HAS a Ph.D. debunking it.

So you are saying that you have no idea whether the basis of your own position is correct or not...you simply chose a side, probably based on your politics..but not based on whether or not the science actually supported the story being told.

The basis of my own position is based on me trusting those that have actually gone to college to learn to understand and investigate why the climate is changing. The same way I trust my mechanic to fix my car. Or a mason to build my house. I also notice you are dodging the question. Why doesn't it bother you that the link you provided sites a study that is NOT peer-reviewed. Oh, and politics have nothing to do with it. Science is apolitical. The reason I know this is because this discussion is being had on a political forum and then predominantly in the US. While in scientific circles the consensus on human-induced climate change is high and growing.

 

[forkup]

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

So do you have any particular problem with either the data or the methodology? Or do you just not like who did the study? If there are problems with either the data or the methodology, by all means point them out...if you just don't like the people who did the study, then once again..you have nothing.

I'm not a scientist. Neither do I claim to be. So asking me to find flaws in this thing is like asking your plumber to do brain surgery and then using the fact that he can't as proof that it's impossible. Having said that. Yes, I personally have a problem with the methodology. Since I know from my high school science class that part of the scientific method involves REVIEW. He didn't subject himself to it. Come to think of it why doesn't that breach so obvious that a layman can easily catch it doesn't bother someone who can find people who post stuff on a blog trying to invalidate climate change?
As to the data itself. Luckily I have the internet and I know how to use it.
We Fact-Checked a Bogus "Study" on Global Temperature That's Misleading Readers
This is someone who actually HAS a Ph.D. debunking it.

So you are saying that you have no idea whether the basis of your own position is correct or not...you simply chose a side, probably based on your politics..but not based on whether or not the science actually supported the story being told.

By the way, what is your Ph.D. in since your comfortable judging your position on climate change to be correct and an outlier to be frank?

 

[Taz]

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Wrong again....

View attachment 267546

Your source has no factual content... Above is empirical evidence that calls bull shit on your modeled source.

"ever recorded", not ever in time. See the difference?

So your source is what, 35 years in length? And the earth is 4.5 billion years old...

If you can not see the lunacy in your claim, I cant help you...

Again, they aren't claiming hottest "ever", but rather since that sort of thing has been recorded. Geez, did I fall into some dumbass rabbit hole?

Millions are saved then since cold is the primary killer in weather related deaths.

You are this dumb. Think about it.

 

[Third Party]

Actually...no we haven't...recently I have posted at least 8 published studies which find that our effect on the total atmospheric CO2 is vanishingly small...you "know" that we have changed the composition of the atmosphere like you "know" that the emperors new clothes are simply lovely...it is a fiction. The fact is that we don't produce enough CO2 to even overcome the year to year variations in the earth's own CO2 making machinery.

People who believe that we are adding a great deal of CO2 to the atmosphere are most always suffering from a lack of perspective and scale... A single cup of water is nothing to us, but a disaster of epic proportions to an ant colony. From the perspective of an individual, the amount of CO2 we produce must seem enormous....but alas, to the atmosphere, the amount of CO2 we produce is barely noticeable... Here, perhaps this will assist you in developing some sense of the scale involved...

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Sorry guy...it wasn't...which leads into the fakery involved in the surface temperature record...the fact is that the earth has not yet warmed up to the average temperature that existed at the onset of the little ice age. All this gnashing of teeth over the "hottest evah" temperatures is nothing more than a response to data tampering which result in an apparent temperature that is 1/100th of a degree over the previous year...

It is pure unadulterated bullshit...do you really believe anything like a real average temperature can be derived when at present, on average there is one data collection station for every 10,000 square miles and a large percentage of those are in urban areas measuring a heat island effect...and all this happening on a planet whose daily maximum and minimum temperatures span 200 degrees?..and then on top of that, the "hottest evah" temperatures are expressed in terms of anomalies of a very short time span rather than being given in actual temperatures?

Are you really unable to see the sheer absurdity of believing anything such a record might provide?

I just gave you proof.

You appear to be deranged mentally. Sorry, I can't help you. I wish I could.

An opinion piece from a liberal newspaper constitutes proof in your mind? Little wonder you have been duped... It is always interesting to see what passes for proof in the minds of people who have bought into pseudoscience....or any other scam for that matter....thanks fo the insight.

No, they are reporting on what a European satellite agency found. See how that works?

Its probably a Celsius/Fahrenheit thing. CNN did the conversion.

 

[Billy_Bob]

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

So do you have any particular problem with either the data or the methodology? Or do you just not like who did the study? If there are problems with either the data or the methodology, by all means point them out...if you just don't like the people who did the study, then once again..you have nothing.

I'm not a scientist. Neither do I claim to be. So asking me to find flaws in this thing is like asking your plumber to do brain surgery and then using the fact that he can't as proof that it's impossible. Having said that. Yes, I personally have a problem with the methodology. Since I know from my high school science class that part of the scientific method involves REVIEW. He didn't subject himself to it. Come to think of it why doesn't that breach so obvious that a layman can easily catch it doesn't bother someone who can find people who post stuff on a blog trying to invalidate climate change?
As to the data itself. Luckily I have the internet and I know how to use it.
We Fact-Checked a Bogus "Study" on Global Temperature That's Misleading Readers
This is someone who actually HAS a Ph.D. debunking it.

So you are saying that you have no idea whether the basis of your own position is correct or not...you simply chose a side, probably based on your politics..but not based on whether or not the science actually supported the story being told.

By the way, what is your Ph.D. in since your comfortable judging your position on climate change to be correct and an outlier to be frank?

LOL... As a Phd candidate and someone who holds a masters degree, it IS an outlier. It has no physical evidence to support it's hypothesis as it does not even meet the criteria for being called a theroy.. Natural Variation and the Null Hypothesis have a much greater probability..

 

[Billy_Bob]

June was the hottest ever recorded on Earth

Sorry guy...it wasn't...which leads into the fakery involved in the surface temperature record...the fact is that the earth has not yet warmed up to the average temperature that existed at the onset of the little ice age. All this gnashing of teeth over the "hottest evah" temperatures is nothing more than a response to data tampering which result in an apparent temperature that is 1/100th of a degree over the previous year...

It is pure unadulterated bullshit...do you really believe anything like a real average temperature can be derived when at present, on average there is one data collection station for every 10,000 square miles and a large percentage of those are in urban areas measuring a heat island effect...and all this happening on a planet whose daily maximum and minimum temperatures span 200 degrees?..and then on top of that, the "hottest evah" temperatures are expressed in terms of anomalies of a very short time span rather than being given in actual temperatures?

Are you really unable to see the sheer absurdity of believing anything such a record might provide?

I just gave you proof.

You appear to be deranged mentally. Sorry, I can't help you. I wish I could.

An opinion piece from a liberal newspaper constitutes proof in your mind? Little wonder you have been duped... It is always interesting to see what passes for proof in the minds of people who have bought into pseudoscience....or any other scam for that matter....thanks fo the insight.

No, they are reporting on what a European satellite agency found. See how that works?

Its probably a Celsius/Fahrenheit thing. CNN did the conversion.

IF that were the case, there would be a 35 deg difference.... LOL