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.
Ian -
That sounds like a conspiracy to me....thousands of scientists all over the world, working for literally hundreds of different agencies, and all manipulating the temperature records in exactly the same way to defraud the public....I suspect the Illuminati will be behind this somewhere.
I just don't believe that the scientific community would be capable of the secrecy and unified decision making necessary to do such a thing even if they wanted to. It would require tens of thousands of man hours and emails and conferences for such a conspiracy to function for a day.
To me it seems FAR more likely that you've just got the wrong end of the stick.
He keeps bringing up conspiracies because that is precisely what you are attempting to suggest.
But you believe they have a common understanding and agreement to lie to the public.
Sorry, dude, but that'd be a conspiracy.
Ian C -
Exactly as Crick suggests, at the point that you imply collusion and premeditation between scientists, you also suggest a conspiracy.
That conspiracy, to my mind, is impossible for a number of reasons.
I just think that IF data is changed, there is probably a valid reason to do so.
But you believe they have a common understanding and agreement to lie to the public.
Sorry, dude, but that'd be a conspiracy.
So you finally admit that AGW is Conspiracy to push forward an religious based agenda and not based on any actual science..
Good for you!
Why would any data need to be changed?Ian C -
Exactly as Crick suggests, at the point that you imply collusion and premeditation between scientists, you also suggest a conspiracy.
That conspiracy, to my mind, is impossible for a number of reasons.
I just think that IF data is changed, there is probably a valid reason to do so.
Why would any data need to be changed?Ian C -
Exactly as Crick suggests, at the point that you imply collusion and premeditation between scientists, you also suggest a conspiracy.
That conspiracy, to my mind, is impossible for a number of reasons.
I just think that IF data is changed, there is probably a valid reason to do so.
Edit: BTW, that would indicate to me you know the data is changed. So you agree with what Ian pointed out.
NASA GISS numbers are officially out today, at +0.76C, tied with October 2005 as hottest October on the record (starting 1880).
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts dSST.txt
NASA GISS numbers are officially out today, at +0.76C, tied with October 2005 as hottest October on the record (starting 1880).
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts dSST.txt
And interesting stuff it is to.
I found this graph very interesting, which shows the temperature anomaly - where red shows degrees abover average and blue below average.
You may have heard that September 2014 was the warmest September ever recorded and that the past six months were the hottest April through September in 130 years of records. NASA Earth Observatory readers sometimes ask: How much does it matter when a monthly or yearly temperature record is broken? And where does global temperature data come from?
For instance, the map above depicts temperature anomalies, or changes from the norm, between April and September 2014; it does not show absolute temperatures. Reds and blues show how much warmer or cooler each area was during that period in 2014 compared to an averaged base period of the same months from 1951–1980.
NASA GISS Research Features Rising Temperatures A Month Versus a Decade