Government agencies tampering with climate data has made legitimate climate science difficult to find. In this short video we bypass the propaganda and do some real climate science.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
Piers Corbin has been using spectral analysis on weather records for years, producing pretty reliable (in comparison with the Met Office) long term forecasts. Co2 based global warming is conspicuous by its absence. Even producing better results does not protect you from vilification by the arrogant incompetents, and fraudsters.
Time series (impulse response) models appeal to the technically naive, for whom a model is little more than a computer game, they provide little in the way of actual insight, and produce results which Darrel Huff would describe as ‘gee whizz’ graphs. If they coded the correct equations, they might tell us what will happen, but with no understanding as to why . As it is the computer games code up fiction.
I wouldn’t call Fourier series, etc. simple, but that and other math concepts are taught in every freshman engineering calculus-etc class, and we are expected to be able to know how and when to apply them. It’s the same for scientists, as the class is called “calculus for engineers and scientists”. So how do staff persons at NOAA and NASA not know about these techniques? They must, but anyone who presents their findings must get stuffed by their manager or that person’s manager. Or they only hire people who are lazy and only do exactly what they are told.
I wonder how many of the smug sanctimonious prigs who so passionately attack ‘deniers’ have even heard of a Fourier transform, let alone know how to apply it to a data stream.
Math was my hardest subject. I am very grateful to the scientists, engineers and mathematicians who helped me, with my lowly Bachelor of Arts degree, to understand enough of this stuff to split open my old paradigm. You don’t know how much I admire rational, logical, science-minded people of integrity like you, Gordon and the others who help make this blog better. Thank you for your contributions.
The climate system is extremely complex with hundreds, if not thousands, of potential modes of oscillation, consequently practically any external disturbance will set up a forced oscillation.