New NOAA Research Puts Global Warming 'Hiatus' in Doubt (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 22, 2024, 05:01:50 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  New NOAA Research Puts Global Warming 'Hiatus' in Doubt (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: New NOAA Research Puts Global Warming 'Hiatus' in Doubt  (Read 4265 times)
The Free North
CTRattlesnake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,569
United States


« on: June 06, 2015, 03:28:03 PM »

Only the future is certain!  It's the past that's always changing.

They finally did it!  Years of torturing the temperature data, every time increasing the warming trend, bit by bit...culling stations that didn't conform...leaving a relative few mostly in urban areas.

The joke is that as the glaciers advance on us, the folks at NOAA will be standing at the last weather station on earth holding a lighter to the thermometer proclaiming "the MODELS were right all along and it's worse than we thought!"

But nobody would look into the smoke and mirrors and genius statistical manipulation involved here.  I'm the denier and they are the objective scientist.  Just remember.  They get paid for their work by the government who has a vested interest in keeping you scared of the weather and the future.  I dont.

They lowered the upward trend in sea surface temps during the 80s and 90s by adjusting temps upward through the 80s by 0.02°C.  Then the adjustments declne to -0.03°C in the 1997-2000 period...when the hiatus actually began.  Then the adjustment slope quickly climbs to 0.05°C by 2013/14.

So they added 0.08°C to the trend over 2000-2013 which was enough to say the hiatus technically didn't occur.

And yet other datasets disagree.  The Argo buoys deployed globally show no warming and the satellites show no warming.

Instead they relied on adjusting sst data collected from ships and figured those in extra heavy into their algorithms.

Again...I'm the science denier!

This pretty much covers everything I was going to say, great work friend.
Logged
The Free North
CTRattlesnake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,569
United States


« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2015, 03:29:41 PM »

Only the future is certain!  It's the past that's always changing.

They finally did it!  Years of torturing the temperature data, every time increasing the warming trend, bit by bit...culling stations that didn't conform...leaving a relative few mostly in urban areas.

The joke is that as the glaciers advance on us, the folks at NOAA will be standing at the last weather station on earth holding a lighter to the thermometer proclaiming "the MODELS were right all along and it's worse than we thought!"

But nobody would look into the smoke and mirrors and genius statistical manipulation involved here.  I'm the denier and they are the objective scientist.  Just remember.  They get paid for their work by the government who has a vested interest in keeping you scared of the weather and the future.  I dont.

They lowered the upward trend in sea surface temps during the 80s and 90s by adjusting temps upward through the 80s by 0.02°C.  Then the adjustments declne to -0.03°C in the 1997-2000 period...when the hiatus actually began.  Then the adjustment slope quickly climbs to 0.05°C by 2013/14.

So they added 0.08°C to the trend over 2000-2013 which was enough to say the hiatus technically didn't occur.

And yet other datasets disagree.  The Argo buoys deployed globally show no warming and the satellites show no warming.

Instead they relied on adjusting sst data collected from ships and figured those in extra heavy into their algorithms.

Again...I'm the science denier!

Richard Muller says it's 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer than 250 years ago. And this was because of work that was trying to prove the climate deniers right. Obviously he's not a denier any more.
What magic crystal ball did Richard Muller use to calculate the global temperature of 250 years ago?

Thermometers carefully placed to only record the most urban (read warmest) areas of a region with next to no coverage outside of the industrialized world or in rural areas.

You know...reliable data.
Logged
The Free North
CTRattlesnake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,569
United States


« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2015, 03:30:19 PM »

And before anyone makes a comment, reanalysis is riddled with its own problems and is by no means a perfect substitute for complete satellite coverage.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 10 queries.