Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
- The Other Side Of The Pond
- “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Big Pharma Sales Tool
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- 622 billion tons of new ice
- Fossil Fuels To Turn The UK Tropical
- 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV’s
- Fossil Fuels Cause Fungus
- Prophets Of Doom
- The Green New Deal Lives On
- Mission Accomplished!
- 45 Years Ago Today
- Solution To Denver Homelessness
- Crime In Colorado
- Everything Looks Like A Nail
- The End Of NetZero
- UK Officially Sucks
- Crime In Washington DC
- Apparently People Like Warm Weather
Recent Comments
- dearieme on Diversity Is Our Strength
- arn on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- Crashex on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- arn on Diversity Is Our Strength
- GeologyJim on Diversity Is Our Strength
- Bill Odom on “a persistent concern”
- arn on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- conrad ziefle on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- Francis Barnett on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- dearieme on “even within the lifetime of our children”
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.