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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (883620)	8/30/2015 4:22:09 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Recommended By Brumar89 D.Austin Respond to of 1575535

liberals are haters and anti diversity, if you don't think like them they hate you

To: Brumar89 who wrote (883620)	8/30/2015 4:31:49 PM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Recommended By D.Austin FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575535

Hottest Year? Not According To Satellites August 30, 2015 By Paul Homewood [ Channeling Chicken Little alarmists: OMG! The planet is burning up because of global warming ... how can wingers not believe it ... just look at that picture. ] http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-change-2015-will-be-the-hottest-year-on-record-by-a-mile-experts-say-10477138.html Meanwhile, back in the real world, the much more comprehensive and accurate satellite data shows nothing of the sort. Below are the average annual anomalies for 1998 through 2014, along with 2015 YTD. http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0beta/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0beta3 http://data.remss.com/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_3.txt For UAH to surpass the record, the average anomaly for the last five months of the year would need to be 0.88C, a virtual impossibility since the July figure was just 0.18C. https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/08/30/hottest-year-not-according-to-satellites/ * August 30, 2015 2:41 pm Two large differences are: 1) The surface land data is extremely sparse, whilst the staellite cover every square inch effectively, with the exception of the poles. 2) The surface land data is then mixed together with sea surface temps, which is rather like adding together apples abd oranges. The actual SST’s are only a minute part of the ocean as a whole, from top to bottom. Although there are always lags and short term variations, it is a law of physics that warmer seas will evaporate more, and therefore transfer that excess heat to the atmosphere, which makes the divergence between satellite and surface illogical. I think Roy Spencer summed it up when he said last year: In my opinion, though, a bigger problem than the spotty sampling of the thermometer data is the endless adjustment game applied to the thermometer data. The thermometer network is made up of a patchwork of non-research quality instruments that were never made to monitor long-term temperature changes to tenths or hundredths of a degree, and the huge data voids around the world are either ignored or in-filled with fictitious data. https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/roy-spencer-satellite-v-surface-temperature-measurements/ Satellites are evil deniers! Don't listen to people who tell you about satellites! I wish Obama would shoot those blasphemous satellites down! Bernie will shoot them down when he's President and the world will cheer.