Duke Physicists Call Out NASA and NOAA's Adjustments as improbable..

[jc456]

He has a theory as to how the ocean temperature adjustments prove something nefarious, but I can't figure out what that something is. As I've been saying, the ocean temperature adjustments make the total warming look smaller, and that's all you need to know for purposes of disproving the grand conspiracy.

And that's what you keep asking me to show the graph of. Again. So here's one example. May 2015. You were participating in the thread. Have a nice vacation.

Cooling The Past In The Faroes | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Well I'm a man of my word. I'll see you in a week.

 

[mamooth]

And I salute you for that, so I formally release you from that obligation. Please feel free to stick around.

 

[flacaltenn]

So flac demonstrates that the ocean temps have been corrected to make the warming look smaller, just as I've been saying. Thus, I can't figure out where his conspiracy comes from, or where it's trying to go.

jc, you claim to understand what's going on. So, in your own words, tell us what flac is trying to say. If you're not just playing yes-man, that should be no problem for you.

Don't tell me you've caught a bad case of Crick's "cantreadagraphworthadamn" ...

I'm looking for the data you won't post to back up your claims. That chart in post #91 shows the past PUSHED DOWN and the present PUSHED UP for ocean temperatures. Pivot point AGAIN in the 50s and 60s..

If you're not gonna show us all the ocean corrections YOU THINK supports your bleacher views --- then

 

[flacaltenn]

He has a theory as to how the ocean temperature adjustments prove something nefarious, but I can't figure out what that something is. As I've been saying, the ocean temperature adjustments make the total warming look smaller, and that's all you need to know for purposes of disproving the grand conspiracy.

And that's what you keep asking me to show the graph of. Again. So here's one example. May 2015. You were participating in the thread. Have a nice vacation.

Cooling The Past In The Faroes | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You're an ass. The SST graphs are WATER temps -- not the air temperature that is used in GISS and Hadley and not the CORRECTIONS from GISS or Hadley.. . Same depression of older temperatures that make our current warming look LARGER than it is. Essentially matches the hack job on the USA land record minus the additional warming they added to US warming in the 80--->20XX.. You're attempting to spin back and forth with no progress at all.

 

[mamooth]

Flac, it's not spin to be consistently point out that you're not making any sense. That's why nobody else can figure out what your conspiracy theory is supposed to be.

Best I can tell, your argument boils down to "Adjustments exist, therefore they must be faked". As that's not a very compelling argument, it would explain why nobody is paying much attention to it.

 

[flacaltenn]

Flac, it's not spin to be consistently point out that you're not making any sense. That's why nobody else can figure out what your conspiracy theory is supposed to be.

Best I can tell, your argument boils down to "Adjustments exist, therefore they must be faked". As that's not a very compelling argument, it would explain why nobody is paying much attention to it.

Post #91 is one of SEVERAL running records of ocean AIR temperatures. The past is pushed down and the present is pushed up with the result of creating yet another "hockey stick" interpretation of data. Pivot point in the 50s and 60s -- where APPARENTLY -- the data was so good -- it required no corrections..

My argument is NOT ""Adjustments exist, therefore they must be faked" --- but like the TOPIC of this thread -- the repeating pattern of this type of correction is so IMPROBABLE as to suggest willful manipulation.

Evidence, motive are all there. As in the ability to claim LONGER RECORDS of unprecedented warming than could be claimed without this convienient manipulation..

You GOT an explanation why all these examples have PERFECT data in the 50s and 60s??

 

[mamooth]

The past is pushed down and the present is pushed up with the result of creating yet another "hockey stick" interpretation of data.

But your graph shows the exact opposite of that claim. Compared to 2007 data, the 2013 data shows the past pushed up and the present pushed down, making the warming look smaller. Hence, conspiracy theory go boom.

You GOT an explanation why all these examples have PERFECT data in the 50s and 60s??

Sensible people would probably point out how that's a time frame when errors which went in two different directions were roughly equal. If you want to call that "perfect", so be it, but nobody else is describing it like that.