jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 139,641
- 29,308
- 2,180
it is!!! shhhh......"Studder"?
Must be secret denier cult lingo.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
it is!!! shhhh......"Studder"?
Must be secret denier cult lingo.
Don't forget the post I put up already from WUWT, that shows that the data from the past is altered to make the now look warm. Ain't it fun?
Don't forget the post I put up already from WUWT, that shows that the data from the past is altered to make the now look warm. Ain't it fun?
The last post I saw of such data actually showed that data from the very early 1900s had been made warmer and as you moved closer to the present day, the adjustments got less and less. The average of corrections for the last several decades was zero.
You see we are in a sinodal pattern and just as it should we are cooling and will continue to cool for some time. The Peak, which alarmists have been touting as "unprecedented" is simply bull shit as it has happened before millions of times. If you simply take the patterns out to their logical ends you will find the cyclical earth in all of its controlled glory.
The historical plot, as above, takes all those papers the warmist tout and throws them in the round file. All of their screams about CO2 are laid waste as lies. Yet they want to deprive millions of rights and the ability to feed and care for themselves to institute a command and control Communists style government.. under the guise of saving the planet..
Only Fools still believe the garbage of these marxist/socialist/communists pieces of trash.
To which I replied:
Your graph states that it is 2008 minus 2014. The graph is negative throughout with a minimum at approximately 1900. The negative value means that the 2008 was LESS than 2014. That would mean that adjustments RAISED temperatures in the past - by the greatest amount in about 1900 and by zero in more contemporary times. This is precisely the opposite of the charge you and yours have been making all along.
Funny, that. Will that error cause you to rethink your infantile charge that NOAA is filled with Marxist/socialist/communists? I'm betting it won't.
Maturity diagram showing net change since 17 May 2008 in the global monthly surface air temperature record prepared by theNational Climatic Data Center (NCDC), USA. The net result of the adjustments made are becoming substantial, and adjustments since May 2006 occasionally exceeds 0.1oC. Before 1945 global temperatures are generally changed toward lower values, and toward higher values after 1945, resulting in a more pronounced 20th century warming (about 0.15oC) compared to the NCDC temperature record published in May 2008.
Hahahahahaaaa. NCDC has explained the reasoning behind the adjustments they have made. You, on the other hand, have presented zero evidence to support a charge of fraud beyond the fact that you don't like the results.
Hahahahahaaaa. NCDC has explained the reasoning behind the adjustments they have made. You, on the other hand, have presented zero evidence to support a charge of fraud beyond the fact that you don't like the results.
the reasons for, and the definitions of, their methodologies do not match the results that come out of the computer black box. eg. after the Texas fiasco last summer many stations and areas were examined and the TOB adjustment was found to be much larger than the stated average in most cases.
when queried, the govt agency said it would present a full explanation but so far not even a preliminary report has been issued. if the past is any indication, then the only response will be "check the webpage for an explanation of the methodology", after many months have gone by.
There you have it. A massive global conspiracy. The world is NOT getting warmer.
Second, thousands of sites have had temperature readings from that era (1900-1940) adjusted upwards. Such adjustments have been clearly explained and I have seen no indication that actual climate scientists have the slightest concern that such adjustments weren't justified. Thus it does not surprise me to see similar adjustments, in that time period and in that direction, made to other records.
.
Third, in dealing with millions and millions of data records, mistakes clerical, technical and technological are unavoidable. You saw that the issue in Cullen County, Tx was clearly - and completely innocently - explained. I see no reason - no reason AT ALL - to make intentional malfeasance my first hypothesis.
.
Second, thousands of sites have had temperature readings from that era (1900-1940) adjusted upwards. Such adjustments have been clearly explained and I have seen no indication that actual climate scientists have the slightest concern that such adjustments weren't justified. Thus it does not surprise me to see similar adjustments, in that time period and in that direction, made to other records.
.
I have no doubt that at least a few stations have had the 1900-1940 portion of their record revised upwards instead of the far more usual downwards adjustment. so find me three of them. post an earlier version and then the newer revised version with a warmer 1900-1940 segment.
eg.-
2010 vesion
today's version
there has been a large cooling adjustment made to the early 1900's, as you can see. find us some some warming adjustments out of the 'thousands' that you claim exist.