Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- 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!
Recent Comments
- GW on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Francis Barnett on “even within the lifetime of our children”
- conrad ziefle on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Gordon Vigurs on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Bob G on “Earlier Than Usual”
- MLH on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Gordon Vigurs on Perfect Correlation
- Jack the Insider on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Bob G on “Earlier Than Usual”
- John Francis on “Earlier Than Usual”
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.