ScienceRocks
Democrat all the way!
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #61
So you don't like using science to predict the future and how things might turn out? Why post insults???
Personally I like you enthusiasm but your predictions are predicated on realistic temperature trends.
Out of curiosity, have you perused any of the skeptic blogs? They reason things out in the same fashion as you do and I think you may find them very interesting and a source of a lot of information. Check out 'Watts up with that' and read todays article on Nuuk, and tell me if you like it.
Did you get a chance to read the article Matthew? Watts Up With Nuuk? | Watts Up With That?
"So, it seems clear, that at least for Nuuk, Greenland, their GISS assigned temperature trend is artificial in the scheme of things. Given that Nuuk is at an airport, and that it has gone through steady growth, the adjustment applied by GISS is in my opinion, inverted."
"The Stevenson Screen appears to be elevated so that it does not get covered with snow, which of course is a big problem in places like this. I’m hoping readers can help crowdsource additional photos and/or verification of the weather station placement."
Makes a good point about Nuuk greenland and which I don't understand how they can afford to allow this station to be messed up being that there is so little in the way of reporting stations within greenland, which makes one station very important as one station has to make a estimate over a large percentage of land. One screw up like this can hurt it bad throughout the globe, and in fact being on cement causes much more warming then grass, snow, so it can also throw the temperature off, but that would mean moving all temperature stations out of cemented area's. The surface temperature data would become worthless on cements ability to warm the surface layer over the other two, but I read hansens report on this too and overall he said it was small. In which if data is majorly thrown through a loop when your talking about a vast area I'd think would hurt it.
"This is odd, especially for an airport where aviation safety is of prime importance. I just couldn’t imagine they’d leave a faulty sensor in place for two months.
When I switched the Weather Underground page to display days, rather than the month summary, I was surprised to find that there was apparently no faulty temperature sensor at all, and that the temperature data and METAR reports were fully intact. Here’s January 2nd, 2008 from Weather Underground, which showed up as having missing temperature in the monthly WU report for January, but as you can see there’s daily data:"
Yes you would think a airport to have good data...It would appear that the program fucked up. Which begs the question; why not fix it and make the data accurate and add a few manless stations within 30 miles either side...In which we can do to make sure that this data is accurate. It is not like some man needs to be at them like 50 years ago...We have computer run programs...We could put hundreds of these on green land and ice land and throughout the arctic.
"Note that in the example above, temperature and dewpoint are clearly delineated by slashes. Also, when a minus temperature occurs, such as -10 degrees Fahrenheit, it was reported as “-10″, not with an “M”."
"These had to do with missing “M’s” (for minus temperatures) in the coded reports, causing cold temperatures like -25°C becoming warm temperatures of +25°C, which can really screw up monthly average temperatures with one single bad report."
I understand why they have to use the airports data, but it is bad. Being that it has a warm bias from hell.
The only thing that can even start to give us a good idea is satellite, which covers the whole surface of the earth. No pavement...We could check it against 3-4 other satellites and have a solid network. The surface network is not good enough data set for what we can do today in into the future. The bad news is the surface data set is all we have to understand what trends our planet is having.
Last edited: