|
Post by nautonnier on May 27, 2015 10:33:51 GMT
It has already been proposed in several quarters. This is the normal response of the 'caring' progressives to anyone questioning their belief structure.
|
|
zaphod
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 210
|
Post by zaphod on Jun 4, 2015 20:24:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 4, 2015 21:36:03 GMT
" Noaa’s historical observations were thrown out by unaccounted-for differences between the measurements taken by ships using buckets and ships using thermometers in their engine in-takes, the increased use of ocean buoys and a large increase in the number of land-based monitoring stations."Have 'the boys' just found a new method of 'weighting' the soup's ingredients to 'disappear' the pause??? it's long past time for some credible authority to demand that 'the boys' make public (and easily available) every station, bucket, ship and image, together with their resulting temperature time series, that have gone into the 'global temperature soup' for any day, month or year (full metadata required). Let's have at it ... and let everyone have a peek at the chefs and their ingredients that hide behind the curtain. Let the comparisons and fact checking begin. Our tax dollars paid for this.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jun 5, 2015 0:48:40 GMT
My own *quick to measure* barometer on the subject is the percentage of news stories which amount to contrived propaganda in liberal news outlets. And those stories have for the most part been down IMO. They have not given up, but some in the business apparently would like to distance themselves from the AGW agenda/campaign.
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Jun 5, 2015 4:34:40 GMT
There is an interesting article by Ross McKitrick in WUWT on the new improved "warming trend".
I can accept that there is a reason for using the buckets and thermometers data sources for the paper "Global warming has'nt paused" before the satellite info became available, but relying on it subsequently is idiotic.
The satellite measurements cover all the earth's surface and, as far as I am aware, are not subject to human error.
They are consistent with the balloon measurements.
Why anyone would use any other data is beyond me.
I must be growing very cynical: I can think of only one good reason for producing the paper as described.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 5, 2015 5:29:10 GMT
The satellite measurements cover all the earth's surface and, as far as I am aware, are not subject to human error. The satellites still have to be calibrated using objects on Earth that are of a uniform temperature, the circuits will drift, and each satellite will be using different methods so that a time series still amounts to a patch work quilt one way or another. Firstly there is the sensor aspect of the problem and then there is the data analysis part of the problem which seems almost insurmountable given they are attempting to measure the temperature of a partly cloud covered earth. There is therefore a combination of human and machine created errors in that data. Even if all of the people involved in such a project are independant observers of the process they are asking an awful lot of themselves and the technology to measure such a small difference in temperature over a period of many decades.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 5, 2015 5:51:28 GMT
Essentially, and I'm not being sarcastic....Our entire temperature record is junk and incapable of detecting a 1°c rise as the results are an interpretation, not an accurate statistic.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 5, 2015 8:16:12 GMT
Essentially, and I'm not being sarcastic....Our entire temperature record is junk and incapable of detecting a 1°c rise as the results are an interpretation, not an accurate statistic. The record is not junk. It is what it is. Real observations of real things are never going to be accurate. Instead we have to give our best estimate and then accompany this best estimate with our best estimate of the + and - limits of our errors.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 5, 2015 8:55:13 GMT
I know the Australian records are junk and I suspect that it's the same case in most other countries.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 5, 2015 9:29:44 GMT
I know the Australian records are junk and I suspect that it's the same case in most other countries. This board is typically very anti scientific. Time and time again we see big claims being made, accompanied by the assertion the poster knows better than the best minds in Science. Since this is today a group think board - with very few exceptions - a poster can generally say whatever they want and 9 times out of 10 nobody is going to challenge it provided it fits in with the very strong group think. I know some Australians, I also lived in NZ for 17 years. If you want to be scientific the way to go about establishing what you know would be to create a thread and be comfortable about your idea being put under the microscope.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 5, 2015 11:52:39 GMT
I know the Australian records are junk and I suspect that it's the same case in most other countries. This board is typically very anti scientific. Time and time again we see big claims being made, accompanied by the assertion the poster knows better than the best minds in Science. Since this is today a group think board - with very few exceptions - a poster can generally say whatever they want and 9 times out of 10 nobody is going to challenge it provided it fits in with the very strong group think. I know some Australians, I also lived in NZ for 17 years. If you want to be scientific the way to go about establishing what you know would be to create a thread and be comfortable about your idea being put under the microscope. I think generally the discussions here are scientific. ..posters research information from a wide avenue of areas Inc NOAA and NASA data to form opinions. Scientific papers are referenced. Just because the opinions are generally (ok mostly) against the mainstream view does not mean the discussions are pointless.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 5, 2015 12:07:28 GMT
There is an interesting article by Ross McKitrick in WUWT on the new improved "warming trend". I can accept that there is a reason for using the buckets and thermometers data sources for the paper "Global warming has'nt paused" before the satellite info became available, but relying on it subsequently is idiotic. The satellite measurements cover all the earth's surface and, as far as I am aware, are not subject to human error. They are consistent with the balloon measurements. Why anyone would use any other data is beyond me. I must be growing very cynical: I can think of only one good reason for producing the paper as described. "I must be growing very cynical: I can think of only one good reason for producing the paper as described."The paper met the requirement specification of the research Grant With the climate proxies being based more on assumptions than real metrics you can get any answer your funding authority wants. Ethics are sold extremely cheaply by 'scientists' these days. The marketing companies and politicians know how malleable academic ethics are so they go get the results they want - the cost of a scientific report written to support your policies or products is far less than a small local advertising campaign. Science is dead we are in a new dark age.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 5, 2015 12:56:23 GMT
I know the Australian records are junk and I suspect that it's the same case in most other countries. This board is typically very anti scientific. Time and time again we see big claims being made, accompanied by the assertion the poster knows better than the best minds in Science. Since this is today a group think board - with very few exceptions - a poster can generally say whatever they want and 9 times out of 10 nobody is going to challenge it provided it fits in with the very strong group think. I know some Australians, I also lived in NZ for 17 years. If you want to be scientific the way to go about establishing what you know would be to create a thread and be comfortable about your idea being put under the microscope. Andrew, try finding the contiguous records for the vast majority of Aussie sites. Come back to me. You can start here: BOM Climate Data Online
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 5, 2015 13:15:42 GMT
This board is typically very anti scientific. Time and time again we see big claims being made, accompanied by the assertion the poster knows better than the best minds in Science. Since this is today a group think board - with very few exceptions - a poster can generally say whatever they want and 9 times out of 10 nobody is going to challenge it provided it fits in with the very strong group think. I know some Australians, I also lived in NZ for 17 years. If you want to be scientific the way to go about establishing what you know would be to create a thread and be comfortable about your idea being put under the microscope. Andrew, try finding the contiguous records for the vast majority of Aussie sites. Come back to me. You can start here: BOM Climate Data OnlineI went to St kilda SA. No problems there for all the ones i clicked on. did not bother to check further
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jun 5, 2015 13:51:51 GMT
The AGW campaign won't end until arctic ice begins to recover significantly.
|
|