Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Global Warming Emergency In The UK
- Mainstream Media Analysis Of DOGE
- Angry And Protesting
- Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- “what the science shows”
- Causes Of Earthquakes
- Precision Taxation
- On the Cover Of The Rolling Stone
- Demise Of The Great Barrier Reef
- Net Zero In China
- Make America Healthy Again
- Nobel Prophecy Update
- Grok Defending Climategate
- It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Creative Marketing
- No Emergency Or Injunction
- The Perfect Car
- “usually the case”
- Same Old Democrats
- Record Arctic Ice Growth
- Climate Change, Income Inequality And Racism
- The New Kind Of Green
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Bob G on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- arn on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- william on Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- conrad ziefle on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- conrad ziefle on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- william on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- gordon vigurs on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Tel on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Bob G on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
and they are both fantasies based on fabricated data! Pick your poison!
The science is settled, but not the data.
Yes the “Science” is settled! Send money for more research so they will be able to understand weather.
The obvious “Settled point” is that they do not know!
But they prove they are capable of making some really wild A$$ guesses!
I strongly object to the use of the phrase ‘imaginary ___ numbers’ to describe what Hansen has done. Imaginary numbers actually have great utility in the wonderful world of science and engineering. Hansen’s Arctic ‘data’ is a deliberate lie.
Agreed! I always had a soft spot myself for i.
The square root of -1 makes perfect sense as do all the irrational and complex numbers whereas AGW and the Arctic alarmism is completely off the charts.
That’s pretty much the way I see it. I may try to actually quantify the difference one day. But seeing the HadCrut uses much of the same data, one could reasonably assume much of the difference is because GISS invents numbers in the arctic (which is contrary to observed the temps of DMI.) BTW, DMI’s temp model, ERA-40, has come under recent criticism, apparently for being too high.
Very telling graph, and compared to the place ClimateGate came from no less.