Wooah!! Top scientists to examine "fiddled" global warming figures!!!

[orogenicman]

A legend in your own mind... posting discredited and false narratives as science is not posting proof.

Tires wear... causing a range of error
Thermometers expand over time... causing a range of error.

You have posted nothing but denials. That's okay, after all it's what deniers do.

Again, science is not about proof, it is about evidence.

As measuring devices or conditions change the devices are calibrated against known references so that correct factors may be applied to the raw data returned in order to get a useful measurement.

Exactly. This is covered in high school science class, and yet these people just can't get a handle on it. It's sady, really.

I see the crap loving morons continue to pat each other on the back for crap responses and points devoid of basic science tenets...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Speaking of crap responses -

 

[jc456]

Nah,just wondering what the word Tyre was and what 1/8" tire loss Would mean,

Oh. Tyre is the circular rubber thing vehicles roll on. 1/8" decrease in tread depth is equal to a 1/4" diameter decrease. In a 15" tyre that is equal to 1.7% over valued odometer reading.

A 1/4" decrease in tread depth would give, without actually bothering to work it out, about 3.4% overvalued odometer reading.

oh Tires, hmmm ok. which would mean what affect on the odometer until new tires are mounted? How many miles would that be? I don't have a calculation, but I'm fairly confident that it isn't very very very much.

 

[jc456]

I see the crap loving morons continue to pat each other on the back for crap responses and points devoid of basic science tenets...

And you still manage to avoid posting evidence of anything. Ok, admittedly you do manage to deny, but really, that's expected of deniers.

what evidence is it you're looking for? Evidence? I and others here have been asking for evidence and have seen poo poo from you all. So let's not go there friend. Why don't you just admit there is no recorded experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 will do other than Herr Koch's?

 

[jc456]

A legend in your own mind... posting discredited and false narratives as science is not posting proof.

Tires wear... causing a range of error
Thermometers expand over time... causing a range of error.

You have posted nothing but denials. That's okay, after all it's what deniers do.

Again, science is not about proof, it is about evidence.

As measuring devices or conditions change the devices are calibrated against known references so that correct factors may be applied to the raw data returned in order to get a useful measurement.

Exactly. This is covered in high school science class, and yet these people just can't get a handle on it. It's sady, really.

I see the crap loving morons continue to pat each other on the back for crap responses and points devoid of basic science tenets...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Speaking of crap responses -

 

[cnm]

what evidence is it you're looking for? Evidence? I and others here have been asking for evidence and have seen poo poo from you all. So let's not go there friend. Why don't you just admit there is no recorded experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 will do other than Herr Koch's?

Evidence of increased global temperatures has been provided. Do you deny it?

Anyway, Angstrom's interpretation of Koch's crude attempts at measurement (out by a factor of 2.5) have been disproved by

The Temperature of the Lower Atmosphere of the Earth
E. O. Hulburt

Phys. Rev. 38 1876 1931

Calculation shows that doubling or tripling the amount of the carbon dioxide of the atmosphere increases the average sea level temperature by about 4° and 7°K, respectively; halving or reducing to zero the carbon dioxide decreases the temperature by similar amounts.​

 

[cnm]

oh Tires, hmmm ok. which would mean what affect on the odometer until new tires are mounted? How many miles would that be? I don't have a calculation, but I'm fairly confident that it isn't very very very much.

That would be why you don't think it important raw data are adjusted to give useful measurements that can be compared to other odometers' adjusted data, for example.

 

[cnm]

The History of Climate Science

The History of Climate Science

However, the precision of the measurements obtained by Ångström has since been shown to have been poor: his reported decrease of absorption accompanying a 33% decrease in carbon dioxide concentration was 0.4%, when it would in reality be about 1%, enough to make a significant change to planetary temperatures. Not only that, total saturation in the lower atmosphere is not a problem for the Greenhouse Effect: if the upper layers of the atmosphere remain unsaturated, they will still prevent heat getting out into space. The atmosphere cannot simply be treated as a tube full of gas: it has multiple layers, each with its own properties, and how these layers interact is important.

But back then, it was concluded that Arrhenius was wrong and Ångström moved onto other research, despite Arrhenius publishing a paper critical of the experiments and explaining how in the dry upper atmospheric layers, the role of water vapour was of limited importance. This was - and still is - because water vapor in the upper troposphere occurs in concentrations several orders of magnitude less than in the lower troposphere where most of our weather occurs. As luck would have it, however, nobody took a lot of notice of that and, in effect, the carbon dioxide greenhouse effect hypothesis went to sleep for over two decades.​

 

[cnm]

I love a vague reference to a faulty 1900 ce experiment as 'evidence'. Evidence of desperation perhaps.

 

[jc456]

what evidence is it you're looking for? Evidence? I and others here have been asking for evidence and have seen poo poo from you all. So let's not go there friend. Why don't you just admit there is no recorded experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 will do other than Herr Koch's?

Evidence of increased global temperatures has been provided. Do you deny it?

Anyway, Angstrom's interpretation of Koch's crude attempts at measurement (out by a factor of 2.5) have been disproved by

The Temperature of the Lower Atmosphere of the Earth
E. O. Hulburt

Phys. Rev. 38 1876 1931

Calculation shows that doubling or tripling the amount of the carbon dioxide of the atmosphere increases the average sea level temperature by about 4° and 7°K, respectively; halving or reducing to zero the carbon dioxide decreases the temperature by similar amounts.​

First, yes I deny that any of you warmers has ever provided any Valid evidence that 120ppm of co2 changes temperatures .

Second, do you ever read your own posts? There's a big word "calculation " . What does that infer? Hmmmmm

 

[jc456]

I love a vague reference to a faulty 1900 ce experiment as 'evidence'. Evidence of desperation perhaps.

And yet it is the only one. I'm waiting on one of yours, nada to date!

 

[jc456]

oh Tires, hmmm ok. which would mean what affect on the odometer until new tires are mounted? How many miles would that be? I don't have a calculation, but I'm fairly confident that it isn't very very very much.

That would be why you don't think it important raw data are adjusted to give useful measurements that can be compared to other odometers' adjusted data, for example.

Apples and oranges

 

[jc456]

I love a vague reference to a faulty 1900 ce experiment as 'evidence'. Evidence of desperation perhaps.

You claim we haven't provided evidence and yeti you post about evidence I posted! Hmmm losing

 

[cnm]

You claim we haven't provided evidence and yeti you post about evidence I posted! Hmmm losing

My mistake. You haven't provided credible evidence. The definition of that is evidence accepted by the scientific community. I have provided evidence of global warming, you deny that.

Well, that's what deniers do.

 

[cnm]

First, yes I deny that any of you warmers has ever provided any Valid evidence that 120ppm of co2 changes temperatures .

Second, do you ever read your own posts? There's a big word "calculation " . What does that infer? Hmmmmm

Yes, you'd deny anything, even that not asserted.

It implies evidence.

 

[cnm]

Apples and oranges

You are the one who brought up odometers. I guess you'll now deny that too.

 

[jc456]

Apples and oranges

You are the one who brought up odometers. I guess you'll now deny that too.

when? I think you have me confused with some other poster. Did I mention odometer in a thread, yes, but I did not bring it up as a topic. Sorry, try again.

 

[jc456]

You claim we haven't provided evidence and yeti you post about evidence I posted! Hmmm losing

My mistake. You haven't provided credible evidence. The definition of that is evidence accepted by the scientific community. I have provided evidence of global warming, you deny that.

Well, that's what deniers do.

well again, back at ya!!!