How AGW fraudsters turn October into hottest month!!!

[skookerasbil]

Ive been hearing and seeing ( on the internet) this whole "peer review" concept for a couple of decades............mentioned by the AGW crowd as if they have some monopoly on knowledge/information.

But the funny thing is........its made ZERO impact on the real world. None.........the science is not having any effect in the world outside of the "real science" club and a few million supporters. The public just doesn't care ( public meaning "majority ).


Ive asked every single member of the AGW club to come up with one link that displays the science mattering in the real world. That was two years ago........nobody can post up dick.

 

[saveliberty]

Billy Boob, the people that publish real science in peer reviewed journals are my instructors. In the journals, and lectures in the class room.

Kneel at the alter when you say that.

 

[Kosh]

I agree. The Economic Policy Journal people are total frauds.

Cool then posts all the datasets with source code and show your math work as well and let us see if the AGW propaganda holds up..

 

[80zephyr]

Billy Boob, the people that publish real science in peer reviewed journals are my instructors. In the journals, and lectures in the class room.

And? Peer review has been usurped by those that have an agenda.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/hank...-is-harming-scientific-credibility-1405290747

Science used to be non political, its not that way anymore.

Mark

The Wall Street Journal is not a science journal, and since Ruppert took it over, not a very good source to quote from at all.

And the articles in the journals have little to do with politics, mostly observations on the cryosphere, the warming and acidification of the ocean, and melting of the permafrost.

There are many more articles out there dealing with the failure of peer review. You might want to "Google" it.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

The whole "peer review" scam narrative is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the point of anybody caring. Might have mattered some back in the days where Al Gore mattered. Those days are long gone now. The whole "peer review" talking point holds sway in Starbucks and the nether-regions of the internet, but nowhere else. Regular people dismiss that stuff now.....because the peer review teams are the same teams making all these predictions over the years that fall flat on their face.

Sadly, you are correct. Who peer reviews the members of the IPCC? Why, other members of course.

Mark

 

[Old Rocks]

Well yes, there are many. From the people that are incapable of writing material that can make the grade. Or that are trying to publish idiocy that is torn apart on the most basic level of science.

 

[Old Rocks]

The whole "peer review" scam narrative is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the point of anybody caring. Might have mattered some back in the days where Al Gore mattered. Those days are long gone now. The whole "peer review" talking point holds sway in Starbucks and the nether-regions of the internet, but nowhere else. Regular people dismiss that stuff now.....because the peer review teams are the same teams making all these predictions over the years that fall flat on their face.

Sadly, you are correct. Who peer reviews the members of the IPCC? Why, other members of course.

Mark

Really stupid now, aren't you? The whole scientfic community peer reviews major reports like that. And you see the results in the immediate pointing out of errors that are inevitiably in such reports.

 

[80zephyr]

Well yes, there are many. From the people that are incapable of writing material that can make the grade. Or that are trying to publish idiocy that is torn apart on the most basic level of science.

Umm, no. I am talking about papers that have been accepted. Do some research.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

The whole "peer review" scam narrative is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the point of anybody caring. Might have mattered some back in the days where Al Gore mattered. Those days are long gone now. The whole "peer review" talking point holds sway in Starbucks and the nether-regions of the internet, but nowhere else. Regular people dismiss that stuff now.....because the peer review teams are the same teams making all these predictions over the years that fall flat on their face.

Sadly, you are correct. Who peer reviews the members of the IPCC? Why, other members of course.

Mark

Really stupid now, aren't you? The whole scientfic community peer reviews major reports like that. And you see the results in the immediate pointing out of errors that are inevitiably in such reports.

Umm, no. They do not check the science, only the structure.

Mark

 

[Billy_Bob]

I wonder why the NOAA still uses land based thermometers when we have satellites that monitor our temperatures almost worldwide?

Mark

They need a land based system to verify. This is why USCRN was placed. You dont hear about it to much because it shows a 1.2 deg C cooling trend for the last 13 years. The unaltered Sat data is in line with USCRN. For some reason they choose to alter it and adjust it to agree with biased HCN (Historical Climate Network) or the old land based system currently operated by NOAA. Note that when they 'adjust up' the US data it affects the global temp record.

This graph stops in august 2014.
Source

 

[skookerasbil]

The whole "peer review" scam narrative is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the point of anybody caring. Might have mattered some back in the days where Al Gore mattered. Those days are long gone now. The whole "peer review" talking point holds sway in Starbucks and the nether-regions of the internet, but nowhere else. Regular people dismiss that stuff now.....because the peer review teams are the same teams making all these predictions over the years that fall flat on their face.

Sadly, you are correct. Who peer reviews the members of the IPCC? Why, other members of course.

Mark

Yep......same thing as the investigation of Climategate........a totally rigged process.

To this day, there are millions of Americans who still believe the Warren Commission Report about the assassination of JFK!!

 

[Old Rocks]

Why don't you just post from the Daily Globe. Same credibility as WUWT

 

[skookerasbil]

And lets not forget.........every AGW guy in here is buying the official standing of the administration on this guy Gruber and his statements about the Obamacare fraud. In the face of stark facts, some people will just insist on believing makey-uppey stuff...........

This is EXACTLY why they call these people a religion.

 

[skookerasbil]

How Fraudsters Turn the 24th Warmest October Into the 4th Warmest

By the way.........the USMB fraudsters were denigrating the source ( a usual stunt when their shit gets pwned )........which was ECONOMIC POLLICY JOURNAL but it was via RealScience!!!


These people are all fakes.

 

[skookerasbil]

The animation above shows how NCDC turned the 24th warmest October, into the 4th warmest October.

1. The actual thermometer data showed October as the 24th warmest, nearly four degrees cooler than 1947 and 1963, and on a long term cooling trend.
2. After time of observation bias adjustments, the past has cooled, but temperatures are still on a downwards trend.
3. The biggest cheat comes when they apply the UHI adjustment and homogenization, which makes the past much colder (yes, you read that correctly) and turns a cooling trend into a warming trend.
4. Finally NCDC throws in an additional cheat, on top of the USHCN cheats.

gay

 

[mamooth]

After I pointed out how most of the deniers here are now full-time crybaby conspiracy loons, it's probably wasn't the best choice of tactics for deniers to scream their idiot conspiracy theories even louder.

But then, nobody ever accused them of being smart. Loyal cult parrots, definitely, but that doesn't require a 3-digit IQ.

 

[jc456]

We'll call this the official denier surrender thread.

Nearly every denier here is now a full-time delusional conspiracy crank. A moron who guzzles his cult's piss with gusto. A pale mewling spineless thing that attempts to walk upright and fails. A kook loser.

Deniers, your cult has collapsed. Now, you're just weeping over its passing. You need to accept it and move on.

are trying to say something here? LoSiNg............

 

[jc456]

After I pointed out how most of the deniers here are now full-time crybaby conspiracy loons, it's probably wasn't the best choice of tactics for deniers to scream their idiot conspiracy theories even louder.

But then, nobody ever accused them of being smart. Loyal cult parrots, definitely, but that doesn't require a 3-digit IQ.

who cares???????????????????????????

 

[jc456]

Really? I saw no evidence of that from the sites I visited. In fact, it seemed to be just another blog, and not a very intellectually advanced one at that.

who cares????????????????????

 

[jc456]

Billy Boob, the people that publish real science in peer reviewed journals are my instructors. In the journals, and lectures in the class room.

st00pid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!