Discussion Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Discussion Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

From: TimF	4/14/2010 3:46:06 PM
	of 3816

Signal to Noise April 11, 2010, 2:18 pm The Hockey Schtick points to a study on Pennsylvania temperatures that illustrates a point I have been making for a while: A new SPPI paper examines the raw and adjusted historical temperature records for Pennsylvania and finds the mean temperature trend from 1895 to 2009 to be minus .08°C/century, but after unexplained adjustments the official trend becomes positive .7°C/century. The difference between the raw and adjusted data exceeds the .6°C/century in global warming claimed for the 20th century. I think people are too quick to jump onto the conspiracy bandwagon and paint these adjustments as scientists forcing the outcome they want. In fact, as I have written before, some of these adjustments (such as adjustments for changes in time of observation) are essential. Some, such as how the urbanization adjustments are done (or not done) are deeply flawed. But the essential point is that the signal to noise ratio here is really really low. The signal we are trying to measure (0.6C or so of warming) is smaller than the noise, even ignoring measurement and other errors. climate-skeptic.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next