Sometimes when you are saving the planet, you just have to knock 2.1° C off of the 1940 temperature.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
Recent Comments
- Gamecock on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- dearieme on COP29 Preview
- Greg in NZ on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on A Giant Eyesore
- GeologyJim on A Giant Eyesore
- arn on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- Tel on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- dm on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- D. Boss on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Robertvd on UK Labour To Save The Planet
And they are still unable to explain the blip. The same lack of knowledge prevents accurate climate modelling.
Thanks for the reminder. Not that I forgot, but just like commercial advertising it helps to see the message more than once.
Keep hammering away. The battering ram doesn’t break through on the first bump.
Until climate scientists can deal with the PDO, make proper adjustments for UHI and get rid of unjustified adjustments, they will continue to be judged as alarmists prostituting themselves for research dollars and not true science.
Don’t forget solar and earth core heat variations.
Can’t just say they don’t matter because you haven’t figured out how the might be important.
The=they.
You display your research in such fascinating graphics. Only a “tripped-out” (on kool-aid) fanatical Warmist could DENY the blatant “tampering”.
Steve,
O/T and FYI
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/come-shoot-me-s.html#comments
Just for reference: What are the dates for the sources of the first and second graphs in the animation?
GISS V2 vs. V3
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040300000&dt=1&ds=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040300000&dt=1&ds=14
Thanks. This led me to this WUWT article:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/26/nasa-giss-caught-changing-past-data-again-violates-data-quality-act/
For those who are curious: v3 was apparently released in November 2011.
Let’s face it, despite all the BS that is being spouted, there very little understanding of climate-past, present or future. At best it is all speculation.
But I bet you would agree that the range of temperatures from the past has been great enough to dispel any notion that massive out-of- control feedbacks will ever occur.