Sometimes when you are saving the planet, you just have to knock 2.1° C off of the 1940 temperature.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Grok 3 Trusts The Government
- NPR Climate Experts
- Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- “Siberia might stay livable”
- Deep Thinking From The Atlantic
- Making Up Fake Numbers At CBS News
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- “experts warn”
- End Of Snow Update
- CBS News Defines Free Speech
- “Experts Warn”
- Consensus Science With Remarkable Precision
- Is New York About To Drown?
- “Anti-science conservatives must be stopped”
- Disappearing New York
- New York To Drown Soon
- “halt steadily increasing climate extremism”
- “LARGE PART OF NORTHERN CALIF ABLAZE”
- Climate Trends In The Congo
- “100% noncarbon energy mix by 2030”
- Understanding The US Government
- Cooling Australia’s Past
- Saving The World From Fossil Fuels
- Propaganda Based Forecasting
- “He Who Must Not Be Named”
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Grok 3 Trusts The Government
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- William on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- gordon vigurs on “Siberia might stay livable”
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- conrad ziefle on “Siberia might stay livable”
- Timo, not that one! on “Siberia might stay livable”
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
And they are still unable to explain the blip. The same lack of knowledge prevents accurate climate modelling.
Thanks for the reminder. Not that I forgot, but just like commercial advertising it helps to see the message more than once.
Keep hammering away. The battering ram doesn’t break through on the first bump.
Until climate scientists can deal with the PDO, make proper adjustments for UHI and get rid of unjustified adjustments, they will continue to be judged as alarmists prostituting themselves for research dollars and not true science.
Don’t forget solar and earth core heat variations.
Can’t just say they don’t matter because you haven’t figured out how the might be important.
The=they.
You display your research in such fascinating graphics. Only a “tripped-out” (on kool-aid) fanatical Warmist could DENY the blatant “tampering”.
Steve,
O/T and FYI
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/come-shoot-me-s.html#comments
Just for reference: What are the dates for the sources of the first and second graphs in the animation?
GISS V2 vs. V3
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040300000&dt=1&ds=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040300000&dt=1&ds=14
Thanks. This led me to this WUWT article:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/26/nasa-giss-caught-changing-past-data-again-violates-data-quality-act/
For those who are curious: v3 was apparently released in November 2011.
Let’s face it, despite all the BS that is being spouted, there very little understanding of climate-past, present or future. At best it is all speculation.
But I bet you would agree that the range of temperatures from the past has been great enough to dispel any notion that massive out-of- control feedbacks will ever occur.