The official South Carolina record temperature was set at Columbia during 2012. The data from that thermometer is not even remotely credible.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
- Nothing Nuclear Winter Can’t Fix
- “We Are From The Government And We Are Here To Help”
- Blinken Not Happy Yet
- Chief Executive Kamala
- “Investigated And Discredited”
- Ice-Free Arctic Warning
- No One Is Above The Law!
- Securing Reproductive Rights
- Endless Summer At The New York Times
- “baseless claim”
- “Scientists Tell Us”
- Assessing Climate Risk
- Thanksgiving Greeting From Dr. Fauci
- Follow Liz To Canada
- Climate Deal Reached
- “Siberia will become the greatest farming country in the world”
Recent Comments
- dm on “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- D. Boss on Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- dm on Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- William on Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Paul Marks on Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Paul Marks on “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Paul Marks on Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- Paul Marks on Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Bob G on Big Oil Saved The Whales
- arn on Big Oil Saved The Whales
I began to learn about manipulating data back in my high school chemistry class, when I knew enough about theory that I could tell that my lab results ranged from randomly bad to absolutely atrocious. A good fudger also knows that you cannot show up with absolutely theoretically correct data while using imperfect devices, so you fudge in random error that gives you approximately correct (in theory) results. This is in an laboratory environment where all of the other factors are controlled. Apparently, the people at NOAA aren’t that good counterfeiters, because they get the exact correlation between the CO2 and the temperature, even in the natural world where the only things they control are the placement of the thermometers, the selection of which thermometer stations to use and which to close, the blending of data from which location to which location, the correction of systemic error in a nonuniform way, and even then they have to make unfounded adjustments, even to their modern, state-of-the-art thermometers, to get the results which they want. But nobody finds that a bit fishy.
quite possible that South Carolina thermometer did reach 113 and this is how they did it. when it looks like it’s going to max out at 107 let’s just take the thermometer out of the official box which is 5 or 6 ft above the grass and hold it one foot over the black top and see what happens. bingo 113. it happened in Minnesota when we set an all-time low temperature record of 60 below. to be precise it was 59 and a half below and rounded to 60. when it looked like the thermometer wasn’t going to go any lower they took it out of the box and went down to the bottom of a small hill and held the thermometer a foot over the snow and it quickly reached 70 below. but in that case it was all done for curiosity and fun and the low of 70 below was never considered official
According to unconfirmed sources (50 high ranked former intelligence guys),
Michael Mann was seen that day in Columbia with with matches and a lighter 🙂
And maybe, we reached the level of the car industry,
where manipulating data has been fully integrated into the hardware.
good one arn. lol