edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,883
- 1,830
I love it!edthecynic said-One question, how do you deniers explain the fact that the ground station data matches almost exactly the satellite data collected by deniers Spencer and Christy at UAH???? There is no UHIE in space so that excuse does not cut it with satellites and Christy and Spencer are not going to fudge the numbers in favor of global warming especially since they got caught fudging the numbers AGAINST global warming!!!!
what makes you think the satellite data is accurate, or even precise? between bad instruments, bad programming, bad 'corrections', bad calibrations, and even bad satellites why would you place great faith in them? If the land stations are as close to the satellites as you say then that is yet another reason to be suspicious. With all the problems both land and satellite temperature readings have had for decades I think the growing public skepticism is warranted.
Back when Christy and Spencer were cooking the satellite data to contradict global warming by using the opposite sign to correct for diurnal satellite drift, deniers said their UAH satellite data was the ONLY accurate data. Now that they can't use the opposite sign any more, suddenly no satellite data is accurate any more.
Apparently satellite data is accurate beyond question when it goes against global warming but absolutely worthless when the same data supports global warming. A deniers catch 22.
Last edited: