edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,883
- 1,830
Again you fail or pretend not to understand the difference between raw temperature and anomalies.Nope, it actually confirms that the warming trend is increasing. The poorly sited stations the deniers reported were near heat sources, and not being real scientists the deniers thought being near heat sources would increase the warming trend because thec raw temps would be higher. But since real scientists use anomalies, higher raw temperatures actually make the anomalies lower. So when the deniers got their way and the poorly sited stations near heat sources were removed, the artificially lower anomalies were thus removed, much to the chagrin of the deniers, and when the more accurate data went against the denier's expectations they cried foul, like fools.
and you call us liars!
here is a graphic from Watt's paper -
compliant staions are comparable to satellite data. non-compliant stations are much warmer. and NOAA is much higher than either one!!!!!