GISS temperature record is a fabrication

[monovillage]

HEY! A new climate i-phone app!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/29/new-our-climate-iphone-app-released/#more-22707

 

[Throckmorton]

Uh, yes. Other measurements (like monovillage mentioned) are not consistent with the "extrapolations". That calls into question the whole methodology of extrapolation and (essentially) guesstimating. It's not good science either, you're adding assumptions to the mix that may prove to be invalid.



See, that's why the global warming/climate change idea is starting to lose steam and is losing the PR war, with more and more people doubting. When presented with someone else's view or interpretation, people like you and shira go straight to name-calling and ranting rather than adding anything substantial.



Sounds a lot like a religious argument to me "just trust us, you don't understand it, but it's true".

I'm a firm believer that human pollution has an impact on the environment, and I'm open to any scientific perspectives on it. I don't have my mind made up about what is / is not happening to the earth's environment, I look for science to answer those questions. The religious zeal and fervor of the people pushing the global warming angle is enough to drive people away though....... Not to mention of course the left wing political agenda that has conveniently hitched a ride on the MMGW train to further it's goals.

I don't know if you've been reading the posts by the deniers, but they'll jump on any claim that supports their position that science is wrong and they're right. This is the same old story. Not one of them has bothered to read the actual article and apply critical thinking. Here's a clue-- GISS corroborated measuring stations using neighboring ones. The DMI doesn't show a map of stations used, but assuming they didn't do the same corroboration which would have eliminated a lot of points, their analysis doesn't meet the same standard. BTW, since we're talking about spatial analysis, I guarantee that everything is always going to be extrapolated, because you can't physically cover the entire surface of the earth with weather stations. Every piece of the planet without a station is extrapolated for.

The people hired to spread denialist misinformation (the same old tobacco propagandists) are so successful in their PR campaign because science makes much worse PR than conspiracy theorizing.

What pisses me off the most is that no matter how many times I explain that global warming is simple physics, that there are no other causes for current warming besides our GG emissions, that ice cores contain a climate record that doesn't rely on measuring stations, they simply "forget" by the next thread and make the same ignorant claims about voodoo factors and the insignificance of poor little man and evil scientists.

 

[Lemon law]

Maybe many of the monovillage problems are summed up in, "I don't disagree with the fact that the world has been slightly warming over the last 130+ years, or do I disagree that CO2 has an impact on it."

Which may be your ignorance problem, because as we have learned more and more about Global warming, its not simply about CO2 levels anymore. Because its a complex interaction of factors, and to some extent we have simply reached a certain temperature point which triggers the the release of massive amounts of methane formerly trapped in arctic permafrost. What is also clear is the fact we have changed the circulation of Ocean currents, and we do not know exactly what that will do.

To some extent, the global warming deniers assume the rise in temperature we are experiencing now is simply linear and reversible, while Global warming alarmist point out we can reach irreversible tipping points that cause the earth's climate to turn decidedly worse and unable to support much of any life. After all, in times past, the Earth has released massive amounts of sea floor methane hydride, and the following 100,000 years is hell on Earth. And that is only one such tipping point scenario out of many possible.

If nothing else, we are playing Russian Roulette with our future. Some of us may be wreck less gambler types, and others may be nervous Nellies, but when its a world wide wager, why should one group claim more rights than the other.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

I heard those shrinking polar ice caps are because these lying libetral scientists have this crazy secret agenda that will lead to untold riches so they fly these huge planes over the far north and drop boiling water in a blaze of conspiratorial extacy over the ice to make it look like they are melting when in reality they are actually getting bigger and anyway its the suns fault.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I heard those shrinking polar ice caps are because these lying libetral scientists have this crazy secret agenda that will lead to untold riches so they fly these huge planes over the far north and drop boiling water in a blaze of conspiratorial extacy over the ice to make it look like they are melting when in reality they are actually getting bigger and anyway its the suns fault.

Goes to show you what you know about the subject...both caps aren't shrinking...antarctic ice extent is currently 3rd highest on record.

 

[bfdd]

Throckmorton, now do you see what I was saying in those other threads about them not knowing everything? How can you be certain when you don't know everything? I don't like to say I'm 100% certain of shit unless I KNOW without a doubt I am and with every missing little piece of data, every new thing they find out, just proves they don't know jack shit about the whole situation yet claim they do.

 

[Throckmorton]

Goes to show you what you know about the subject...both caps aren't shrinking...antarctic ice extent is currently 3rd highest on record.

Read this, you might learn something
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/20100108_Is_Antarctica_Melting.html

 

[Throckmorton]

Throckmorton, now do you see what I was saying in those other threads about them not knowing everything? How can you be certain when you don't know everything? I don't like to say I'm 100% certain of shit unless I KNOW without a doubt I am and with every missing little piece of data, every new thing they find out, just proves they don't know jack shit about the whole situation yet claim they do.

Nobody says they're 100% certain that the average temperature of the arctic is X degrees, so your point is moot.

 

[bfdd]

Nobody says they're 100% certain that the average temperature of the arctic is X degrees, so your point is moot.

... I'm talking with their overall message. Also, how can they say it's warmer if they aren't 100% certain of the average temperatures in a rather large region of the world? They must not know jack shit then if they're leaving out so much information.

 

[werepossum]

You guys are missing the whole point. We now know that NASA's mission isn't to prove catastrophic anthropogenic global warming - it's to make Muslims feel better about themselves and their religion. Obviously these numbers are scientifically calculated to produce maximum warm fuzziness in Islamic societies. Embrace CAGW, else we'll have another 9/11.

/snark

 

[ElFenix]

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

 

[Throckmorton]

... I'm talking with their overall message. Also, how can they say it's warmer if they aren't 100% certain of the average temperatures in a rather large region of the world? They must not know jack shit then if they're leaving out so much information.

Are you arguing that the temperature for all unmeasured locations could have dropped drastically to compensate for the warming observed at measured locations?

Wow, that's some leap of faith.

 

[Amused]

Are you arguing that the temperature for all unmeasured locations could have dropped drastically to compensate for the warming observed at measured locations?

Wow, that's some leap of faith.

It's no less a leap of faith to assume they've increased???

 

[Throckmorton]

It's no less a leap of faith to assume they've increased???

It's not a leap of faith at all to assume they're not significantly different from the measuring stations or that their interpolated values are accurate to some percentage.

Remember, every point without a weather station on it is extrapolated... Are you going to stop checking the weather at weather.com because there's no station on your roof? If the weather report says it's 90F, are you going to wear a jacket because you're convinced all locations in between stations are cooler?

 

[sandorski]

Just considering that you use the term "denier" in an attempt to equate people that disagree or have doubts about MMGW to Holocaust deniers pretty much says it all about your point of view. I don't disagree with the fact that the world has been slightly warming over the last 130+ years, or do I disagree that CO2 has an impact on it. I just despise the agenda driven advocacy that so many climate scientists like Hansen and others have turned to.

Nah, it just means he sees them like they are.

 

[bfdd]

It's not a leap of faith at all to assume they're not any different from the measuring stations.

Remember, every point without a weather station on it is extrapolated... Are you going to stop checking the weather at weather.com because there's no station on your roof? If the weather report says it's 90F, are you going to wear a jacket because you're convinced all locations in between stations are cooler?

They don't have any temp records above the 80n. They are extrapolating 1200km to get those temps. That's over twice the distance from Los Angeles to Las Vegas. That would be like using Las Vegas temps to extrapolate all the temps for Southern California. That would be incredibly stupid because some regions of Southern California are much much much cooler than Las Vegas and some areas are even hotter.

 

[bfdd]

It's not a leap of faith at all to assume they're not significantly different from the measuring stations or that their interpolated values are accurate to some percentage.

Remember, every point without a weather station on it is extrapolated... Are you going to stop checking the weather at weather.com because there's no station on your roof? If the weather report says it's 90F, are you going to wear a jacket because you're convinced all locations in between stations are cooler?

They actually have quite a few weather stations around me so yeah it's much safer to assume when it says 65F in my area that it's 65F than it is for me to find out the weather in San Fransisco and use that to gauge my local weather/climate here. Do you have any idea how fucking stupid you sound by using data 1200km away?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Read this, you might learn something
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/20100108_Is_Antarctica_Melting.html

Is my statement True or False?

BTW...are you aware of the massive amount of volcanic activity going on under West Antarctica? I thought not. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080120160720.htm

 

[heyheybooboo]

... I'm talking with their overall message. Also, how can they say it's warmer if they aren't 100% certain of the average temperatures in a rather large region of the world? They must not know jack shit then if they're leaving out so much information.

As a percentage of land mass/surface of the Earth, it ain't nuthin' ----





--

 

[PokerGuy]

Nobody says they're 100% certain that the average temperature of the arctic is X degrees, so your point is moot.

They are oh-so-certain that the temperature is just skyrocketing, yet 1) the readings don't confirm it and 2) they apparently don't even measure huge areas and just assume that they are getting much hotter than they are.

And then they call it science and have the gall to call those who don't subscribe to their religion "deniers". I guess I'm one of the deniers, just like those silly "deniers" who kept denying that the earth was flat despite mountains of "evidence" to prove it.

 

[sandorski]

They are oh-so-certain that the temperature is just skyrocketing, yet 1) the readings don't confirm it and 2) they apparently don't even measure huge areas and just assume that they are getting much hotter than they are.

And then they call it science and have the gall to call those who don't subscribe to their religion "deniers". I guess I'm one of the deniers, just like those silly "deniers" who kept denying that the earth was flat despite mountains of "evidence" to prove it.

Yes, indeed you are. Congrats?

 

[Amused]

It's not a leap of faith at all to assume they're not significantly different from the measuring stations or that their interpolated values are accurate to some percentage.

Remember, every point without a weather station on it is extrapolated... Are you going to stop checking the weather at weather.com because there's no station on your roof? If the weather report says it's 90F, are you going to wear a jacket because you're convinced all locations in between stations are cooler?

Oh yes it is! If you look at their map, there are areas that are cooler FAR within the 1200km to 2400km distance they are fudging. Hell, I'm in San Diego. It's 67 degrees here. 12 miles away it's 90+ degrees.

So yes, I would not apply a weather report from 12 miles away to my own area, much less 1200 t0 2400 km.

This is more of the same fudging of numbers to hit a preconceived idea. Not to mention using URBAN stations to measure global temps in the first place, which is the sole reason for the huge heated plumes over the world's most densely populated areas. Applying localized urban heating to the MMGW theory is pure BS. And the shutting down of rural weather stations ONLY serves to make all of this look worse than it actually is.

 

[PokerGuy]

<snip>

Repent now.

Say 10 algore's, then send a check to government for $1,000, and by the grace of Al Gore you might be forgiven your sins of denial.

 

[Throckmorton]

Is my statement True or False?

BTW...are you aware of the massive amount of volcanic activity going on under West Antarctica? I thought not. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080120160720.htm

Your statement is misleading because you're talking about ice area and not ice mass.

 

[Throckmorton]

Oh yes it is! If you look at their map, there are areas that are cooler FAR within the 1200km to 2400km distance they are fudging. Hell, I'm in San Diego. It's 67 degrees here. 12 miles away it's 90+ degrees.

So yes, I would not apply a weather report from 12 miles away to my own area, much less 1200 t0 2400 km.

This is more of the same fudging of numbers to hit a preconceived idea. Not to mention using URBAN stations to measure global temps in the first place, which is the sole reason for the huge heated plumes over the world's most densely populated areas. Applying localized urban heating to the MMGW theory is pure BS. And the shutting down of rural weather stations ONLY serves to make all of this look worse than it actually is.

The reason there's a 30F difference for you is the coastal moderating effect which puts you in a different climate entirely.

BTW, that GISS study eliminated the urban stations because they show artificially high warming. The paper goes into great depth on how they selected stations and corroborated them.