Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Food And Energy Experts
- “Are We Imagining It?”
- The Suffragettes
- Michael Mann Upset
- A Serious Problem
- Miami Drowning
- No Longer The Greatest Existential Threat
- Almost Unanimous Consensus Of Scientists
- Maryland To Drown
- Rapid Virus Mutation
- Wisconsin To Save The Planet
- Magical Musk
- “Scientists Forecast”
- “thing of the past” update
- Defunding The Climate Scam
- “Record Low Sea Ice”
- Leader Of The Free World
- Measuring The Heat
- Bankrupting The #1 Climate Fraud
- Cyclone Mahina
- “tropical paradise”
- “The tragedy of modern war”
- Manhattan Project Victims
- “Plants losing appetite for carbon dioxide”
- “Overcrowding and piles of rubbish”
Recent Comments
- GeologyJim on “Are We Imagining It?”
- arn on The Suffragettes
- arn on The Suffragettes
- arn on Food And Energy Experts
- conrad ziefle on The Suffragettes
- Bob G on The Suffragettes
- Bob G on The Suffragettes
- Jack the Insider on A Serious Problem
- Bob G on Miami Drowning
- Tel on No Longer The Greatest Existential Threat
Reblogged this on Health Science Watch.
You are Cherry Picking again! 😉
I love that stacked temperature scale. That colour scheme is the the real “cherry picking”.
To me, the +/- 2 range should be the deep green and perhaps a blue-green on the minus. +4 should be pale green, and only then start into the yellow-orange-red sequence. A series of blues on the negative side would serve nicely.
This very “progressive” colour scheme makes the cool temperatures seem normal. And would make dirt-standard, normal temps appear alarmingly hot!
So – question (so I can respond to a AGW supporter): all trend lines show either flat (RSS) or lowering of temperatures. Fine. I accept that. But, if someone says, “Well, if 2012 is an outlier on the high side, why not 2013 on the low side?” So, how does one answer such a person?
Thanks, Steve – you have a great blog!
My responses would be as follows.
First, 2012 should not appear as a genuine outlier if you use actual data instead of fabricated ones.
Second, in statistics, when there are major outliers, it is common to remove them from the series and see what that does to the results. If the results (trend in this case) are substantially the same, then it makes no difference to anything. If they’re not the same, that might argue for leaving them out. But the change in trend could go in either direction! If one removes one high outlier and one low outlier from the last two years of a temperature series, the effect of that could just as easily go in either direction. You have to actually calculate it.
Third, if one smooths a temperature series with say a 3- to 5-year centered moving average, then that can give a more realistic picture of the trend, even if the outliers are left in. Steven doesn’t use moving averages in his posts (as far as I’ve seen), but in my experience they can be quite valuable in revealing what’s really going on.
The 3- to 5-year moving averages right now are such that even with the outliers included, they are still far from flat. I’m not sure if I can lay my fingers on some proof of that at the moment, but that’s been my observation since 2006, and it’s been quite consistent since then.
If I have time to assemble something more concrete, I’ll post it at my blog and link here. However, others might know where supporting data and graphics can be found more quickly.
RTF