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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (72251)	5/19/2018 11:54:53 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356667

"How well do ground measurements do with the troposphere?? It is sort of important to measure thatt to!." Why? How many people live there? But, I digress; weather balloons are more accurate than satellites. skepticalscience.com "The idea you and i-node would know more about AGW than an atmospheric scientist is absurd " The idea that I think I know more than the scientists is what's absurd. "telling them where they are making errors is absurd." Showing them where they are making errors is science. For instance, More errors identified in contrarian climate scientists' temperature ... theguardian.com. May 11, 2017 - What Christy and Spencer focus on is the temperatures measured far ... of human caused climate change – but it has been found to be wrong. Errors Cited in Assessing Climate Data - The New York Times nytimes.com Aug 12, 2005 - Until recently Dr. Christy and Dr. Spencer were the only scientists who had ... and Dr. Wentz, identifies a fresh error in the original calculations that, ... "Nobody is debating any more that significant climate changes are coming. Satellite climate record in error : Nature News www.nature.com/news/1998/980820/full/news980820-1.html Aug 20, 1998 - In a report in 1990, Roy Spencer of the NASA Marshall Space Flight .... trends - which iswhy Spencer and Christy's satellite data set was so ...

To: koan who wrote (72251)	5/19/2018 12:10:40 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 356667

>> The idea you and i-node would know more about AGW than an atmospheric scientist is absurd and telling them where they are making errors is absurd. Uh, I haven't made that claim at all. There are atmospheric scientists who are idiots, and some who aren't. But anything communicated through a third party who is ignorant of the topic is suspect. As to measurements, it really depends on what you're using them for. You can't make a blanket statement that one is better than the other. Even though historically, tree ring data is terribly inconsistent, it provides information for those years where it IS available that is of excellent quality. It just isn't very useful for statistical purposes sometimes. You probably cannot make broad statements about most data sources.