Geniuses Zeke and Mosher say this is first rate science, with very small adjustments that actually decrease warming.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
Recent Comments
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Tel on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Gamecock on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Terry Shipman on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Bob Gutjahr on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
well yes it does, but mostly around 1940
Not a surprise though with them being on the hook with “BEST” and what it was supposed to achieve. For that reason they cannot be considered “sceptics” now because they have to defend their work.
From guys that think when Mann used the Tijander series, right side up and up side down didn’t really matter. (That’s a joke, I have no idea what they thought before Mosher starts picking nits.)
I would be surprised if they actually thought that.
Hence the disclaimer. (I was joking, but I have read that argument in more than one comment from the AGW crowd defending Mann and it was serious.)
The tiny adjustments decrease warming, in the same way that the IPCC is very conservative about their predictions of climageddon.
One explanation is that they have simply made their minds up – there’s a minute increase in CO2 so it’s getting hotter. Period. Now back up the case with rhetoric, stretch the facts, torture the data. Just another day of dirty science.
Mosher is a frontman, a salesman.
Think of anything he says as though he was trying to sell you an old used car. !
Mosher: “I have this great race horse for sale! His Daddy is Man-o-War and his Mum a daughter of Seabiscuit!”
http://slidenspin.webs.com/2%20june%202010%20008ed.jpg
Guy across the street has one of those. Comes running up to the fence when ever anyone is close. Really loves people.
Stunted due to CAGW? Or had a height adjustment algorithm applied?
The size of its rump and legs were adjusted down while its head was adjusted up. The trend is now clear. If the beast chomps on a few more clumps of CO2-overstimulated greenery it will tip over.
CO2 kills. We must act immediately.
Oh, an Icelandic Ice Age pony!
I miss our pony, Molly, who died after 32 years. She was a sweetie.
You implied it. I’ll say it straight out – Mosher is a paid-for shill and a straight up liar, who’s sold his soul for the cash.
Do NOT let my wife see that pic. I don’t need another mouth to feed.
My gals are a lot prettier. I have four registered Shetland Palomino mares. I really want to train them as a four-in-hand.
I expect that the root of the problem is that Zeke and Mosh aren’t looking at differences between 2002 and 2014. They’re most likely part of the “don’t use historical data, it’s out of date!” crowd.
Thanks, Steven, for the clarity of your presentation.
On the other hand, Mosher, does a lot of hand waving and no clarification on Climate Etc. He seems to want to convince the audience that BEST adjustments to data cannot be biased since they were were automatically made by algorithm – not by human decision.
I
It is really hard to believe that any honest person would try to argue that adjustments made automatically by algorithm must be unbiased. I mean, seriously… They really are not so stupid. Their argument is the equivalent to saying, “You Honor, I can’t be guilty of premeditated murder! Yes, I saw and recognized the victim. Yes, I pointed the gun at him. Yes, I got him in my sights and yes, I pulled the trigger and fired. But I can’t be guilty of murder! Once the round left the muzzle, it was completely on it’s on and out of my control. Only the bullet’s fidelity to the laws of physics made it strike the victim. I had nothing to do with it!”
Correct.
1. A human programmed the computer.
2. If the adjustments are made automatically by algorithm then there is ZERO credibility because there is no data showing a thermometer was replaced, a thermometer fell out of calibration, a new barn was built and the station was moved 100 feet up the hill or any other changes.
3. There has been no side by side comparison with the old and the new to show exactly what the bias is.
When the side by side tests were done by German veteran meteorologist Klaus Hager, the adjustments were shown to be grossly in the WRONG DIRECTION!
Oh for an honest court system!
Good analogy.
+10
I see the 2014 version from this page http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
Where can one find the 2002 image?
http://wayback.archive.org/web/20021218055459/http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/update/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A.ps
Nice. Thank you.
Mosher claims that if raw data is used the temp. Would have been warmer. “Then again use raw data the world is warmer”. (At Curry’s blog)
It was warmer in the past.
If Mosher illustrates this I would like to see it. In the meantime he is incapable of explaining just one change in Iceland. Failing that, it is sheer arm waving to pretend to explain the entire dataset.
I’m still trying to figure out why they homogenize buoys and land stations together. I’ve never seen a rational explanation of those either. (Mostly US Pacific Coast.)
..and yet he still hasn’t explained this anywhere:
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/screenhunter_7078-feb-12-00-34.gif?w=640
99 people out of 100 or close to it will never look beyond the statement made by an authority, and thus they can say whatever they want. When one of the tiny minority or people who know it’s a lie say so the vast majority of people will simply shout him down repeating authority’s (false) declaration.
If you like your adjusted data, you can keep your adjusted data.
How long was Mosher’s canned response: “BEST does not do adjustments”? He must have responded to posts thousands of times with that.
Now they are publishing posts about their adjustments……….http://judithcurry.com/2015/02/09/berkeley-earth-raw-versus-adjusted-temperature-data/