Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The End Of Snow
- Google Maps Adds Context
- Thing Of The Past Update
- Expert Government Forecasting
- Thing Of The Past Comes To England
- “far outside the range of observed variability”
- African Desertification
- Grok Explains Polar Bears
- The Climate Denial Money Machine
- President Trump : “decisively defeat the climate hysteria hoax.”
- New Plan To Rob The Citizenry
- “Fifteen days to flatten the curve”
- Warm December 1923
- “Ensure No One Is Above the Law”
- The Best Electric Cars
- Honeybee Collapse Update
- “a live-animal market in Wuhan, China.”
- Fifteen Year Old Children In Australia Control The Weather
- 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
Recent Comments
- Francis Barnett on Thing Of The Past Update
- Peter Carroll on Thing Of The Past Update
- arn on Google Maps Adds Context
- William on Google Maps Adds Context
- Disillusioned on The Best Electric Cars
- Francis Barnett on The Best Electric Cars
- arn on Google Maps Adds Context
- Billyjack on Google Maps Adds Context
- William on Google Maps Adds Context
- arn on Google Maps Adds Context
The only data to use is the raw data. And even then we must be carrfull becaus even that cane and will be fishi so to speak.
Steve if any one cane do something like put togetter a raw data grap you would be the man to do it. Then also we now what the real climate is.
They also shut down a lot of the weather stations that showed cooling /and are rural as a “cost cutting measure.” Yeah, you can look back 100 years of unadulterated data – but then you will only see the data from the non-closed weather stations.
Except in specific cases with known, describable and explained variation, data should not be altered or adjusted. Any data “adjusted” needs to have a clear explanation of why it was changed and by what process. Lastly, all data, charts, etc., need to have appropriate error bars assigned.
Lacking those things, you get institutions like NOAA pretending to output scientific findings. NOAA is no more believable than the so-called economic reports issuing from Washington.
THANK YOU STEVE FOR REAL SCIENCE!
CryoSat Satellite Finds Arctic Ice Increased 50% in Volume
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/12/17/CryoSat-Satellite%20-Findings-Arctic-Ice-Increase
The striking part of the chart was the cold of the late 1970’s. Aside from that, there is very little change. There is absolutely no sign of significant warming.