Jump to content
Thunder?
Local
Radar
Hot?

tablet

Members
  • Posts

    160
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by tablet

  1. 3 hours ago, BornFromTheVoid said:

    If you know that the older instrument has a clear bias, then you can adjust for it.. This is good scientific practise. Otherwise, you are knowingly used faulty data but not accounting for know changes. This would result in a loss of ability to comare old with new reading, rendering the whole data series invalid. This isn't just a technique used in thermometers, it's used all over the world for countless other things. 

    you know that doing this invalidates the data , and is totally unscientific ,,,you must know this

    • Like 1
  2. Equipment gets updated, stations get moved, techniques improve, spatial coverage improves, biases are identified and corrected, and all this is explained in published papers and reports so everything can be tested and replicated.

     or , the original data was changed void is another way of saying it ,,,yes ?

    • Like 1
  3. if a thermometer in 1950 read 18 degrees , I accept it was 18 degrees , if someone 40 years later says it wasn't 18 degrees , he'd better have a time machine to back up what he is saying ,,but I'm betting he doesn't , and altering the temperature to fit your theory is not very scientific , like the guy who published this

    1774385785_iuhuplpooe.thumb.JPG.9a60ed14479c2ebd20cafe20d86b1451.JPG

    ,,who was held in contempt of court in Canada last year for refusing to show the data he used to come up with this hockey stick , even when he was caught out

    0-09jkk.thumb.JPG.42a380ff5b5f3930e0b68362d2d2769e.JPG

  4. why don't you take a look at the USHCN station readings  , and then with your BSc , you can explain the difference between the original data and the Hansen , GISS 97 and the GISS 2015  charts then ?

    • Like 1
  5. i'll tell you what I'm getting at void , look at these charts , every one of them is based on one set of data , the USHCN station readings , but by using temperature homogenization , every time it's been updated , it looks a little different , cooler in the past , warmer in the present , which is strange to say the least

    1059316472_.opi99809jhuj.thumb.JPG.a5cc85b557a51ab28bbc321c29c5d038.JPGrve4v54PG.thumb.JPG.ef3e9f0bdfa11d4be97fa093318c3831.JPG

    in 2005 NASA released this

    muh798.thumb.JPG.e8fd6615b0edc36870ae181cff49ec5e.JPG

    then in 2007 ,,this 212794966_pi909jki.thumb.JPG.b655e73790faed9f1545f5888a7aa146.JPG

    which is strange because the temperature didn't alter all that much during that period , and NASA do the same with tidal gauges

    lkk0899879.thumb.JPG.84791c56b23af4c1f2f2715fc00280ff.JPG

     

    • Like 1
  6. April 9, 2018, British Antarctic Survey - New study reveals increased snowfall in Antarctica over last two centuries

    https://phys.org/news/2018-04-reveals-snowfall-antarctica-centuries.html

    "Our new results show a significant change in the surface mass balance (from snowfall) during the twentieth century. The largest contribution is from the Antarctic Peninsula, where the annual average snowfall during the first decade of the 21st century is 10% higher than at the same period in the 19th century."

     

    • Like 1
  7. published May 7th 2018 - Powerful hurricanes strengthen faster now than 30 years ago

    https://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.aspx?id=4504

    While many factors are at play, the chief driver is a natural phenomenon that affects the temperature of the waters in the Atlantic where hurricanes are powering up, according to scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

    They found that a climate cycle known as the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation or AMO is central to the increasing intensification of hurricanes, broadly affecting conditions like sea temperature that are known to influence hurricanes

  8. I think claiming that the 2 sides of the Arctic that are open to the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans , and there for at the mercy of the weather from both ( wave , wind ) , and then posting something like this

    mkjhgnu88989.thumb.JPG.59c6147f00811c296992883e81b89cca.JPG

    without mentioning weather conditions , is a little bit disingenuous , and then pointing the finger and shouting "AGW " when there could be many factors involved , and nobody seems to look and see if the conditions happened before , here is a depiction that was published in National Geographic back in 1971 , showing the level of summer ice ( as they could tell without satellite data )

    lmui65.thumb.JPG.36aca36f25dd27a51d91548cc29c8272.JPG

    ..and here is todays graphic from the DMI , which I don't think is bad at all , but that could change , just like the weather

    ijny4545.thumb.JPG.c7cfe53679a23ff8342c7fe4cf80fe2d.JPG

     

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...