Interesting conversation with Grok, defending NOAA adjustments. Grok was wise not to answer my final question, because either way it loses. Either the adjustments are bogus, or UHI is much larger than acknowledged.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 70C At Lisbon
- Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
- The Other Side Of The Pond
- “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Big Pharma Sales Tool
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- 622 billion tons of new ice
- Fossil Fuels To Turn The UK Tropical
- 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV’s
- Fossil Fuels Cause Fungus
- Prophets Of Doom
Recent Comments
- arn on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- conrad ziefle on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- conrad ziefle on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- conrad ziefle on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Francis Barnett on 70C At Lisbon
- Disillusioned on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Mac on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Disillusioned on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Francis Barnett on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- Bob G on Grok Defending The Climate Scam
Of course the temperature record has to be adjusted in a bias manner, because the theory isn’t panning out. changing subjects, very sad flooding tragedy in Texas. turns out the exact same spot experienced a bad flood about 40 years ago and that one killed 10 teenagers.
It really surprises me that so many lives were lost. Isn’t it more than in the recent hurricanes, which span a much larger area? Anyway, Grok, my experience with AI is they don’t understand nuances. I ask programming questions, get answers that don’t seem right, ask again, in a different way, and get a completely different answer. Ask a simple question and it’s faster than looking it up in a book. Ask a complex question, and the answer varies depending on the way you ask it.
you can find a video online that shows how rapidly the water Rose. once you see that video you’ll wonder why the casualty list is so low. it looked like a tsunami. as for Grok, and AI, I’m wondering how is this any different than just asking Google? getting a bias answer off the internet is nothing new. ?
you can find a video online that shows how rapidly the water Rose. once you see that video you’ll wonder why the casualty list is so low. it looked like a tsunami. as for Grok, and AI, I’m wondering how is this any different than just asking Google? getting a bias answer off the internet is nothing new. ?
you can find a video online that shows how rapidly the water Rose. once you see that video you’ll wonder why the casualty list is so low. it looked like a tsunami. as for Grok, and AI, I’m wondering how is this any different than just asking Google? getting a bias answer off the internet is nothing new. ?
Wouldn’t the heat island effect by 1971 justify a downward adjustment rather than an upward adjustment of the raw data? What possible excuse could there be to interfere with the 1899 data?
This adjustment seems further suspect because we usually expect January to be colder than October.
No. you’re fiddling with the records. lol. here in South Central Minnesota our forecast doesn’t even hit 90 in the next 10 days which leads us to the middle of meteorological summer… a bit on the cool side, with no extreme heat. my dad was born in 1916 and recalls when he was a kid the floorboards on their jalopy caught on fire because it hit 114 in southwest Minnesota. that’s a heat wave from the past. seldom happens now
I find it hard to get too excited about temperature anomalies which vary between zilch and bugger all.
Come on… Wooden floor boards ignite at 459 deg F. so 114 F is not going to cause them to catch on fire. Hot exhaust and/or a fuel or oil leak would be more likely.
yes, you’re correct. it’s a story from the past and all good stories have a bit of exaggeration. you know, like that story about the 2020 presidential election being the most fair and secure ever.
For 100+ years there was no need to interfere with data.
But around the time of Al Gores Nobel Prize & Obamas presidency the next level of propaganda was unleashed on plebs and science.
Old temperatures were considered unreliable and old experts have been retroactively declared by modern experts who believe that 0.01 % of co2 will turn the planet into a fireball to be too dumb to read thermometers ( and for some reason those adjustments always benefit the warming narrative, which is impossible in a 50:50 scenario).
The interesting thing is – the more time passes the harder it gets to discover flaws of an old system.
Eyewitnesses are no more, data got lost or destroyed
(even something of way more publicity and importance and only half as old like the moon landing lost a lot of data),
yet nowadays we have acti…experts who suddenly realized how the real data looked like in 1900.
The same kind of experts who declared Hunters laptop to be fake
and who found Iraqs WMDs in a testtube (I still wonder how the, very liquid gas, got into Powells testtube?
I guess some American spy walked into an Iraqy? WMD storage, pulled out a Pipette (but forgot a cam), opened the bomb with a tin opener, extracted 2 drops,dropped them in the tube and walked home – and AGW data adjustment works the same way.
You are encyclopedic on these things. Are you sure that you are not the real AI?
I’m neither woke nor do I repeat agenda related stuff,
therefore I can not be an AI.
At best an anti-AI as my opinion is usually on the opposite side of the official spectrum
+ my English is way worse than that of the worst AI and at least as mechanic.
My most AI achievement so far was to finish a 45 min chemistry test within 45 seconds(I just wrote down the final results) and 3 logicals (two 5*5 and one 6*6) within 23 minutes without any mistake – but I’m pretty sure an AI can do that in 2 milliseconds.
The only thing I’m better in than an AI is predicting specific future outcomes and expert reactions as AI’s are simply not allowed to use Agenda 21 and WEF roadmaps to get to the obvious results
I’m at best an AI as = autodidacted (occasional )intelligence with some hilarious random knowledge and some serious educational gaps on the other side.
The Guadalupe river has been known as Flash Flood Alley for years.
The reason is that the river has a limestone bed not mud, so it’s like pouring water on a concrete road.
https://www.newsweek.com/flash-flood-alley-has-history-deadly-camp-floods-meteorologist-2095170
Why do people put their own and their children’s lives at risk by camping on the banks of this river?
Well, I’m sure it is beautiful when it is not deadly, and who would believe that they would lose a 1:20,000 or so, bet. And of course we are all supermen and would figure out how to cheat the bet if we were to, somehow, lose it.
Once again, Grok is an example of why no one should ever have trusted Elon Musk. While the leftists always talked about what a genius he was, I never believed any of that. Elon Musk believes the climate change/CO2 scam. It’s a farce, yet he thinks it’s 100% true. Anyone who subscribes to that ridiculous religion is not to be trusted.
Elon Musk is an operator and a hustler. He knows how to make money, though. I’ll give him that. He’s a genius only in the sense that he knows how to feather his own nest. Now that Trump ended the fascist EV mandate, Musk is trying to win back favor from the leftist cult because he knows they’re the only people who would buy his dumb cars.
… no one should ever have trusted Elon Musk.
I agree.
Elon Musk believes the climate change/CO2 scam. It’s a farce, yet he thinks it’s 100% true.
Nah, I don’t agree. I believe he knows it’s a scam.
Elon Musk is an operator and a hustler. He knows how to make money…
I agree. He’s such a cool operator and a hustler, he has people like you thinking he is an AGW believer. I do not get any hint of sincerity on his part concerning the Climate Scam.
On the other hand, I still like Elon. He did do Twitter into X, which allows us to exist. He did back Trump extensively during the campaign. I attribute the falling out to be due to two strong egos, both a bit “off” in their social-verbal part of the brain. In one hundred years, they will both be remembered better than anyone else of our time period-and many of the things they will be remembered for, they haven’t done yet.