A comment from Anthony’s blog
Paul K2 says:
Thank goodness there are at least some people here who can spot the mathematical mistake in this post from Real-Science dot blog, so I don’t have to address it. The conclusions the post draws are nonsensical. Maybe Real-Science should actually be called Fake-Science.
Enough stupidity please, from the left.
The graph shows how many all time daily temperature records were set during each year. It is calculated by parsing all the yearly records at a particular station for a particular day of the year. The year which has the highest temperature wins. All years have an equal chance of setting the record. Every station has exactly 366 daily high temperature records associated with it.
What Paul K-9 is trying to suggest is that the graph plots successive temperature records. Obviously that is not the case, because if it were – the first year would set a record at every station on every day. There would be an asymptote coming down the Y-axis on the left side.
There is a small bias to the left because the record is set by the first occurrence of the record high. In a warming world, this wouldn’t have much effect, because later temperatures would be warmer on the same date.
The graph below has the opposite bias. In this case, the most recent date of a tie wins. Even though the bias favors recent temperatures, the 1930s is still by far the hottest.
If there were thousands and thousands of daily records being set (as claimed by Masters et al) the spike would be on the right side of the graph – not on the left side.
My advice to alarmists. Try using your brain once in a while.
I’ve engaged with these sorts of people before and that’s how it works. Think up some “refutation” no matter how asinine, and then everyone on their side can cite it. No brain cells were strained in the process.
These people are stupid and dishonest beyond my comprehension.
Steven, if they stop being idiots then they won’t be alarmists anymore. A double win there. I don;t believe they are capable of becomeing clear thinking or honest , at least not without a transformation of spirit.
Speaking of paulk2 I’ve read a couple of his posts over at Anthony’s site and it is ths same old garbage possibly from a different face. You never know who it is talking because none of them have the courage to use their real names. Everything he says is quickly and correctly debunked by several commenters. Unlike the alarmist sites he is not attacked personaly just his statements and very doubtfull facts are corrected and put into proper context. Like any of the cagw crowd he rather quickly is reduced to blather. It is amusing to watch the warmists come on there with their arrogant attitudes and self righteousness and then have no honest facts to support their statements. I guess we are supposed to understand their feelings or their good intentions and go along with their dismantling of the wonderfull American way of life to assuage their guilt.
Lol, well, I tried to explain it to them.
Yes you did.
I am not nearly as well versed as you in any of this.
But it seems an easily understood concept.
The record number of high temperatures occurred in the 1930’s.
Had those record temps, or the number of them recorded, been exceeded in subsequent years, there would be more on the right .
It just isn’t that hard to understand. This is the data.
The alarmists are not only ssying that it is warming, they are trying to claim catastrophic warming, a real danger to the very existence of life on this planet. If that were so, there should not be any reasonable, unaltered data set that shows nothing at all is happening over a long period to time.
Could you make the same graph for record daily minimums?
Yes
This comment from PaulK2 (WUWT- “Why the U.S. East Coast heat wave was not unusual. . . .”) is a real gut-buster:
If the emerging El Nino really kicks in, then 2013 should be the hottest year in the history of human civilization. Couple this with low Arctic ice pack influence on the jet stream Rossby waves, and next year should see some really severe weather patterns.
You’ve got to hand to the Warmist True Believers: their sky-is-falling prognostications can be hilariously entertaining at times. In the statement above, PaulK2 assumes the role of climate psychic, offering a blood-and-thunder prediction based on a new branch of science called “speculative climatology.”
‘…next year should see some really severe weather patterns.’
I’ll take it a step further, and predict that we WILL see some really severe weather patterns in 2013. Just like in 2012. And 1012. And 012. And 1012 bc. And 2012 bc. And 12 mya. And….
“If the emerging El Nino really kicks in, then 2013 should be the hottest year in the history of human civilization. ”
There must be some perverse joy in these negative prognostications.
Some day, some shrinkologist will write a famous book about disaster worship and it its
underlying pathology.
That isn’t what Briffa’s tree told me.
Mann’s Tiljander lake crud concurs with Briffa’s tree
That tree was Waterboarded !
Here guys….. one of the most idiotic thing these people are doing is focusing on 1.5% of the globe’s surface. http://suyts.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/reality-check-to-the-profoundly-stupid-the-u-s-isnt-the-entire-globe-this-year-is-the-3rd-coldest-in-the-last-15-years/
Steve apparently your graph was beyond the grasp many alarmists, and sadly others who aren’t. Maybe a simpler concept is in order. Feel free to use any or all of this.
Hi,
would you plot the cold records as well, please.
Just to be fair.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/07/10/another-abuse-of-statistics-by-the-team/