Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Watt certainly hasn't and unlike your pathetic SS website which won't publish anything that challenges them Watt and company INVITE criticism. A huge difference from you clowns who wish to do nothing but stifle discussion.
Watt can't get anything published because he doesn't write anything publishable.
I don't know.....Hitler seems to think he got something published!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYup_vNcoEs]Hitler's Reaction to the Watts Study - YouTube[/ame]
People like Hansen say it's aerosols from China and the developing world. He says aerosols caused the slight cooling in the 1960s-1970s before we really clean up our act.
And how many times has he been wrong? And you still believe anything he says?
People like Hansen also got caught tampering with the temperature record. You believe people like hsnsen?
As opposed to people like you? Watt and company never made shit up, either, did they?
Watt certainly hasn't and unlike your pathetic SS website which won't publish anything that challenges them Watt and company INVITE criticism. A huge difference from you clowns who wish to do nothing but stifle discussion.
Which official record has any skeptic ever been accused of, much less caught altering?
McIntyre got caught altering GISS records in 2007. They even blocked him from acquiring the data by blocking his IP address for a while. He is such a nosy Parker, always butting in where he is not wanted.
Wasn't it in 2007 when McIntyre forced GISS to acknowledge that it's claims of "warmest year ever" weren't true and he caught them adding 0.15C to the record since 2000? I belive he caught GISS altering the record, not caught altering it himself.
He got blocked for writing a script that asked the GISS system to produce graphs of each and every station in the data set which tied up the system...not for altering, or attempting to alter the data itself. He was reinstated and allowed to continue to run the script if he did it late at night or on weekends.
As opposed to people like you? Watt and company never made shit up, either, did they?
Watt certainly hasn't and unlike your pathetic SS website which won't publish anything that challenges them Watt and company INVITE criticism. A huge difference from you clowns who wish to do nothing but stifle discussion.
What a liar you are, Walleyes. Watts and company were very eager when Muller announced that he was going to run a more complete inventory of weather records than had ever been compared before, to check whether the figure that Hansen, Jones, and other researchers were accurate, and whether the compensation figures of siting, and changes of surrounding of siting of weather stations influence the accuracy of the weather record.
Muller also called Hansen, and told him what he planned to do. Dr. Hansen stated that he was glad to have the input.
When Muller published the report from his investigations, Watts immediatly named him as another 'enemy', and disavowed any association with him. Watts is a whore with no credentials whatsoever in any branch of science.
Watt certainly hasn't and unlike your pathetic SS website which won't publish anything that challenges them Watt and company INVITE criticism. A huge difference from you clowns who wish to do nothing but stifle discussion.
What a liar you are, Walleyes. Watts and company were very eager when Muller announced that he was going to run a more complete inventory of weather records than had ever been compared before, to check whether the figure that Hansen, Jones, and other researchers were accurate, and whether the compensation figures of siting, and changes of surrounding of siting of weather stations influence the accuracy of the weather record.
Muller also called Hansen, and told him what he planned to do. Dr. Hansen stated that he was glad to have the input.
When Muller published the report from his investigations, Watts immediatly named him as another 'enemy', and disavowed any association with him. Watts is a whore with no credentials whatsoever in any branch of science.
Watts had a legitimate beef with Muller. He shouldn't have released unpublished work without permission.
Do you have the quote where Watts called muller 'the enemy'?
Which official record has any skeptic ever been accused of, much less caught altering?
McIntyre got caught altering GISS records in 2007. They even blocked him from acquiring the data by blocking his IP address for a while. He is such a nosy Parker, always butting in where he is not wanted.
Wasn't it in 2007 when McIntyre forced GISS to acknowledge that it's claims of "warmest year ever" weren't true and he caught them adding 0.15C to the record since 2000? I belive he caught GISS altering the record, not caught altering it himself.
He got blocked for writing a script that asked the GISS system to produce graphs of each and every station in the data set which tied up the system...not for altering, or attempting to alter the data itself. He was reinstated and allowed to continue to run the script if he did it late at night or on weekends.
No, it was McIntyre who screamed bloody murder for at least two years for data via numerous FOIA requests that he later admitted that he already had, and DID NOTHING WITH. And it wasn't 0.15C. It was 0.015C, and made no difference whatsoever in the record.
No, it was McIntyre who screamed bloody murder for at least two years for data via numerous FOIA requests that he later admitted that he already had, and DID NOTHING WITH. And it wasn't 0.15C. It was 0.015C, and made no difference whatsoever in the record.
No, it was 0.15. Sorry you have a problem with numbers. Maybe that is why you have been so easily fooled into believing the hoax.
You'll have to prove that, because I remember it differently. What is certain is that McIntyre's paper made no difference whatsoever in the conclusions that came from the data.
And the fact remains that no skeptic has ever been caught or accused of altering an official record while it is common practice among those in control of the NOAA, GISS, CRU and other data bases.
Whether or not it is true that deniers have been CAUGHT, the fact remains that they make up a lot of bullshit (and have been caught doing it many times) and post it all on pseudoscience web sites because they know they can't get a single word of it published otherwise. The fact is that if ANY climate scientist behaved as unprofessionally as your pals do, they'd be barbequed, and likely fired on the spot. And SSDD, the official record keepers are allowed modify the official record as needed to correct errors or to improve their product because that is PART OF THEIR JOB DESCRIPTION!
No, it was McIntyre who screamed bloody murder for at least two years for data via numerous FOIA requests that he later admitted that he already had, and DID NOTHING WITH. And it wasn't 0.15C. It was 0.015C, and made no difference whatsoever in the record.
You'll have to prove that, because I remember it differently. What is certain is that McIntyre's paper made no difference whatsoever in the conclusions that came from the data.
No problem, unlike you, I don't depend on memory....I actually took the time to look it up.
Does Hansen?s Error ?Matter?? ? guest post by Steve McIntyre | Watts Up With That?
There is a positive skew so that the impact of the step error is about 0.15 deg C according to Hansen.
Whether or not it is true that deniers have been CAUGHT, the fact remains that they make up a lot of bullshit
Which skeptic is actually the caretaker of an official record and in a position to alter it?
You'll have to prove that, because I remember it differently. What is certain is that McIntyre's paper made no difference whatsoever in the conclusions that came from the data.
SSDD said:No problem, unlike you, I don't depend on memory....I actually took the time to look it up.
Does Hansen?s Error ?Matter?? ? guest post by Steve McIntyre | Watts Up With That?
Whether or not it is true that deniers have been CAUGHT, the fact remains that they make up a lot of bullshit
SSDD said:Which skeptic is actually the caretaker of an official record and in a position to alter it?
You'll have to prove that, because I remember it differently. What is certain is that McIntyre's paper made no difference whatsoever in the conclusions that came from the data.
SSDD said:No problem, unlike you, I don't depend on memory....I actually took the time to look it up.
Does Hansen?s Error ?Matter?? ? guest post by Steve McIntyre | Watts Up With That?
This is what I was referring to:
Stephen McIntyre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The adjustment caused the average temperatures for the continental United States to be reduced about 0.15 °C during the years 2000-2006. Changes in other portions of the record did not exceed 0.03 °C; it made no discernible difference to the global mean anomalies.
The draft is scheduled to go through one more round of revisions at a meeting with both diplomats and scientists later this year.
Which official record has any skeptic ever been accused of, much less caught altering?
When has Watts ever _not_ lied about the data? That's the Watts specialty, being a flagrantly dishonest POS. And most denialists adore him. Birds of a feather, I guess.
In contrast, none of the mainstream scientists have fudged data. That's one of the many reasons why they have such worldwide credibility. Meanwhile, the routine fudging by the denialists is one of the many reasons why no one gives them the time of day.
All scientists are skeptics.
You'll have to prove that, because I remember it differently. What is certain is that McIntyre's paper made no difference whatsoever in the conclusions that came from the data.
SSDD said:No problem, unlike you, I don't depend on memory....I actually took the time to look it up.
Does Hansen?s Error ?Matter?? ? guest post by Steve McIntyre | Watts Up With That?
This is what I was referring to:
Stephen McIntyre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The adjustment caused the average temperatures for the continental United States to be reduced about 0.15 °C during the years 2000-2006. Changes in other portions of the record did not exceed 0.03 °C; it made no discernible difference to the global mean anomalies.
0.15 by your own words now. Just a few posts back when I said 0.15 you claimed 0.015. Do you recognize the difference between those numbers?
Changes in other portions of the record did not exceed 0.03 °C; it made no discernible difference to the global mean anomalies.
All scientists are skeptics.
Four words....."the science is settled". Does that sound like a skeptic speaking? Really?
Since you ask the question...by all means provide an answer. Show us one or two examples where it is proven that he was caught lying about the data.
