Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (184223)	8/20/2015 12:26:59 PM
From: weatherguru	4 Recommendations Recommended By locogringo rayrohn TideGlider tonto Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224861

LOL! Gotta call bullshit on that. Here's a map of the 'adjusted' temperature anomalies for July 2015. It looks like new adjusted data is filling Africa. Where did those measurements come from? The African temperature network? Why not extrapolate the -5F anomalies in Antarctica stations? Oh, that might drop things by 0.036F and ruin the 'record'! Look at 2014 anomaly. They extrapolated the grids to fill in the edges of Africa, and there's still a lot of missing data (Africa is HUGE, but map projections don't illustrate that properly). Now I see why NOAA/NCDC spend 20-days adjusting the data. July 1998 was hotter...but really, what is 0.036F? A fart? This diverges even more from satellite data. And for the 100th time. Japan uses the same data.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (184223)	8/20/2015 1:06:43 PM
From: weatherguru	2 Recommendations Recommended By longnshort tonto Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224861

Here is the land-only temperatures. One grid box is about 1200-sq-km. This is 2015! Can you imagine how little data there were before 1950? Most of these boxes are shaded based on a single reading, typically at an airport. The 'filled in' version is adjusted and extrapolated by human programs. Really? 0.036F. LOL! Satellites can measure at much, much higher resolution. It's truly bullshit that the global average are reported to the thousandth of a degree.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (184223)	8/20/2015 2:06:26 PM
From: JakeStraw	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB locogringo TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224861

And New York City had the third coldest February since they started recording temperatures in Central Park in 1869...

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (184223)	8/24/2015 5:38:42 PM
From: Jack of All Trades	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224861

Deceptive temperature record claims Warmest month announcements have no scientific basis Climate Change Scam Illustration by Greg Groesch/The Washington Times more > By Tom Harris - - Sunday, August 23, 2015 The U.S. government is at it again, hyping meaningless records in a parameter that does not exist in order to frighten us about something that doesn’t matter. NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA) announced this week that according to their calculations, July 2015 was the hottest month since instrumental records began in 1880. NOAA says that the record was set by eight one-hundredths of a degree Celsius over that set in July 1998. NASA calculates that July 2015 beat what they assert was the previous warmest month (July 2011) by two one-hundredths of a degree.