GISS temperature record is a fabrication

[JohnOfSheffield]

these aren't above ground eruptions or even venting, it's all done down under so what you're talking about I don't believe fully applies.

btw these are active volcanos, they just haven't erupted in 2k years. that means they're still venting out heat etc under the ice. which would cause melting which could raise the water temp around it and perpetuate the cycle.

Oh i know, just google what i asked you to google, the periods of heating are extremely short for this type of volcanic activity because of the very reason you'll find if you just google it, i'd do it for you but i cannot access google from here.

Pretty please, with sugar on top...

 

[bfdd]

Oh i know, just google what i asked you to google, the periods of heating are extremely short for this type of volcanic activity because of the very reason you'll find if you just google it, i'd do it for you but i cannot access google from here.

Pretty please, with sugar on top...

ah ok, i wasn't doubting you it just wasn't clear if you knew these were above or below by your posts. i will look it up though. btw i didn't mean to say "this is what happens" i meant to say "this sounds like it could happen to me" with my last post.

 

[monovillage]

iirc, there are satellites that measure temp zooming around in space. where's that data? or do they only measure upper atmospheric temps?

The Hadley/CRU graph in an earlier post uses satellite data, it also disagreed with NASA/GISS at to the temps in the arctic. (showed them as cooler) The satellites don't have complete coverage of the poles, but much better coverage then the imaginary numbers that NASA/GISS uses.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

ah ok, i wasn't doubting you it just wasn't clear if you knew these were above or below by your posts. i will look it up though. btw i didn't mean to say "this is what happens" i meant to say "this sounds like it could happen to me" with my last post.

I probably shouldn't have used the word "eruption", it's still an eruption if it breaks the core but not the surface though, that was what i meant.

Nema problema, i think we just misunderstood each other.