Are Government Temperature Graphs Credible?

task0778

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
7,178
Reaction score
5,057
Points
2,065
Location
Texas hill country
" Nothing the government says is credible. "

These days, nothing that ANYBODY says is all that credible. It seems like just about everybody has an agenda, and whenever a survey or report comes out you have to find out who sponsored it. Especially if it has anything to do with politics, which of course global warming/climate change does. So, you hold your water until you see if somebody refutes the original survey/report and try to determine which is closer to the truth. Generally, you look to see if the people who are claiming "X" to be true are asking for money from the gov't, well to me that's a red flag against them. Do these people have an oar in the water or not, IOW are they asking for gov't paid funding?
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
Ninety years ago, the New York Times reported unanimous consensus that Earth’s climate was controlled by the sun.


Was that somehow wrong? I guarandamtee you that if I switched the Sun off right now, we would begin having the worst climate ever imagined about 8 minutes later.

No, the point Tony was making that rational science researchers strongly support the SUN warming the earth effect position, but today a small group of pseudoscientists think it is the bogeyman molecule that control the climate.
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
Still no factual counterpoint to the CONTENT of the article in post one, maybe it is quite good then?
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
64,941
Reaction score
15,816
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Airports have acres of asphalt and concrete which absorb solar radiation and heat the surrounding air.
Not a great place to get representative temperatures...unless you want to show an artificial warming trend.

Do you think the airport temperature is the same over the whole airport? ... it can be several degrees different where the planes are touching down ... a half mile away ... but the reported temperature is close enough for aviation purposes ... why install more thermometers if they don't give us useful information ...

This doesn't change what I asked you to do ... if you won't do it, then don't say I'm wrong ...
An airport -- or a city -- is an artificial heat island. You average the temperatures found in artificial heat islands and of course they're going to show warmer than the average temperatures of forests and grasslands -- which cover far more area of the planet than do cities.

What happens when you look at data gathered from places free from human development?

America’s Most Advanced Climate Station Data Shows US In A 10-Year Cooling Trend

Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.

The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.

The climate stations use three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation to provide “continuity of record and maintenance of well-calibrated and highly accurate observations,” NOAA states on its website. “The stations are placed in pristine environments expected to be free of development for many decades.” In essence, NOAA chose locations so they don’t need to be adjusted for “biases” in the temperature record.

Data compiled from these stations shows a slight cooling trend over the U.S. for the past decade.

Can't scare people with that, though, can you?
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
Gee no one can address the article's CONTENT at all, must be too hard to do and maybe 100% correct after all.

I asked you to discuss the content. Predictably, you refused, going the route of evasions instead. I think everyone takes that as your admission that you have nothing to back up the claim you make in the post title.

My challenge for you to actually debate still stands. Show us some evidence that the temperature record is wrong. So far, you haven't shown any such evidence.

However, don't do it by yelling "LOOK AT MY SOURCE!" and doing nothing else. That's not debate, that's a bad argument from authority. Show data from neutral sources, explain it in your own words. If your argument is good and you know the subject, you should have no problem doing that.
 
Last edited:

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
An airport -- or a city -- is an artificial heat island.

The raw data shows that rural temperature have risen faster than urban temperatures. That flatly debunks your "It's the UHI" theory.

So, the data says you're wrong. Therefore, you're wrong. It's that simple. Getting triggered won't change anything.

Funnier yet? You using a 2015 article as evidence of no recent warming. Let's update that by merely 2 years.

uscrn.jpg


So, now there's a strong statistically significant warming trend.

Needless to say, you'll keep using the obsolete data, because being honest about the data would interfere with your propaganda.
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
Gee no one can address the article's CONTENT at all, must be too hard to do and maybe 100% correct after all.

I asked you to discuss the content. Predictably, you refused, going the route of evasions instead. I think everyone takes that as your admission that you have nothing to back up the claim you make in the post title.

My challenge for you to actually debate still stands. Show us some evidence that the temperature record is wrong. So far, you haven't shown any such evidence.

However, don't do it by yelling "LOOK AT MY SOURCE!" and doing nothing else. That's not debate, that's a bad argument from authority. Show data from neutral sources, explain it in your own words. If your argument is good and you know the subject, you should have no problem doing that.[

I am the one who started the thread, choosing a topic that asked a QUESTION, which YOU avoid answering. :laugh:

Meanwhile I stated this in post one:

"This is a VERY LONG post, thus worth reading as it utterly destroys warmist/alarmists lies so effectively using their own material.

It is going to entertaining to see how warmists/alarmists will be able to handle all this."

I did make a statement about the content of the article.

Since you didn't answer the question you have nothing but your typical bullshit to offer.
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
No, the point Tony was making that rational science researchers strongly support the SUN warming the earth effect position,

And that theory is obviously wrong, since the data flatly contradicts it. TSI has been declining since around 1970, but temperature keeps rising strongly. And ocean temps are rising fast as well, which debunks any theory that stored ocean heat is raising air temps.
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
I am the one who started the thread, choosing a topic that asked a QUESTION, which YOU avoid answering.

I keep asking you to participate in your own discussion topic, and you keep refusing.

Your behavior here is the behavior of a troll. You appear to be merely stirring shit.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
64,941
Reaction score
15,816
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
An airport -- or a city -- is an artificial heat island.

The raw data shows that rural temperature have risen faster than urban temperatures. That flatly debunks your "It's the UHI" theory.

So, the data says you're wrong. Therefore, you're wrong. It's that simple. Getting triggered won't change anything.

Funnier yet? You using a 2015 article as evidence of no recent warming. Let's update that by merely 2 years.

uscrn.jpg


So, now there's a strong statistically significant warming trend.

Needless to say, you'll keep using the obsolete data, because being honest about the data would interfere with your propaganda.
Odd how you don't source your graph. Why is that? Is it because you just expect people to accept your cult's dogma without question?
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
Odd how you don't source your graph. Why is that?

Because the OP said such things aren't important, and that any data presented has to be taken at face value. I'm being consistent. You're not.

Is it because you just expect people to accept your cult's dogma without question?

Saying that the real world is the real cult is standard cultist behavior.

Here's the thing. I'm part of the overwhelming majority, and all the hard data all agrees with me. That means I'm part of reality, not part of a cult.

Oh, the source:

Have at it. It will be interesting to hear what you come up with.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
64,941
Reaction score
15,816
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Odd how you don't source your graph. Why is that?

Because the OP said such things aren't important, and that any data presented has to be taken at face value. I'm being consistent. You're not.

Is it because you just expect people to accept your cult's dogma without question?

Saying that the real world is the real cult is standard cultist behavior.

Here's the thing. I'm part of the overwhelming majority, and all the hard data all agrees with me. That means I'm part of reality, not part of a cult.

Oh, the source:

Have at it. It will be interesting to hear what you come up with.
"KIDS' LIVES MATTER so let's stop climate change"

Hyperemotional fear-mongering. And the blogger has no About Me to identify his credentials. But he does have a link to his PayPal.

Further, he discredits Watts' work by linking to government data...which have been proven to be manipulated.

You know -- like you have been.
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
I am the one who started the thread, choosing a topic that asked a QUESTION, which YOU avoid answering.

I keep asking you to participate in your own discussion topic, and you keep refusing.

Your behavior here is the behavior of a troll. You appear to be merely stirring shit.

You are full of baloney.

It is clear you can't address the article at all, thus it is unchallenged.

I have participated in the thread, but you are too busy being a jackass to notice, try reading posts 12, 20 and 23 again..... :laugh:

Meanwhile you made this idiotic statement that was wrong immediately since the hard evidence was right there in front of you at post one:

" The content doesn't back up your wild claim at all. It provides no actual evidence that the NASA GISS data is bad. "

1618114888593.png


1618114936405.png


NASA 1999 shows FOUR years warmer than 1998, but the 2019 NASA chart shows ZERO years warmer than 1998.

You are stupid as shit!

=====

You write:

"Oh, READ MY LINK!

AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014 — IPCC"

===


My reply,

"Ha ha, you didn't back up anything since the IPCC link has more than 100 pages in it, you didn't specify any particular area for me to read that addresses the article, you are just blowing smoke as usual."

Since then you avoid answering my statement about your IPCC link.

Still waiting for a specific section of the IPCC link I asked about, oh you are too busy making demands........ :auiqs.jpg:

YOU posted the freaking IPCC link that has over 200 pages in it, then ignore my statement on what you wanted me to read, that is hypocritical stupidity on your part because you make demands, then fail to follow though from your end. :cuckoo:

YOU ARE ONE VERY STUPID MAN, why don't you drop your demands bullshit it is a new game you are playing and it only make you worse off than ever since you are not even trying to debate anything.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
Hyperemotional fear-mongering. And the blogger has no About Me to identify his credentials. But he does have a link to his PayPal.

Got it. You literally cared nothing about the actual data. You just went looking for excuses to keep telling the same old debunked lies for the glory of your fascist cult, and because the other cultists are lying too, and because lying gives you a sick pervy thrill.

I expected that. And you came through. I never doubted you.

Further, he discredits Watts' work by linking to government data...which have been proven to be manipulated.

Suuuuuuuuuure it has. After all, the cult told you that was true. And you believe. You always believe. You take pride in keeping your mind free from exposure to any impure non-cult sources.

Now, how does TheParty say you should respond to that? Run along and check.
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,323
Reaction score
6,474
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
It is clear you can't address the article at all, thus it is unchallenged.

Unchallenged is my point that "YOU MUST REFUTE ALL OF MY CONSPIRACY BLOG LINK!" is the tactic of a coward.

You've still provided no evidence to back up your claims. The fact that NASA GISS corrected their data just shows .... NASA GISS corrected their data. It does not show they engaged in any bad behavior, or that their current data is unreliable.

So, got anything else?

You write:

"Oh, READ MY LINK!

Your weepy butthurt tirades are painful to read. That's why nobody reads them.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
42,453
Reaction score
21,985
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
When the worthless Negro was President he corrupted NASA and NOAA and they were caught putting out fabricated data.

Expect Joe Dufus' administration to return to the same corruption.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
64,941
Reaction score
15,816
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Hyperemotional fear-mongering. And the blogger has no About Me to identify his credentials. But he does have a link to his PayPal.

Got it. You literally cared nothing about the actual data. You just went looking for excuses to keep telling the same old debunked lies for the glory of your fascist cult, and because the other cultists are lying too, and because lying gives you a sick pervy thrill.

I expected that. And you came through. I never doubted you.

Further, he discredits Watts' work by linking to government data...which have been proven to be manipulated.

Suuuuuuuuuure it has. After all, the cult told you that was true. And you believe. You always believe. You take pride in keeping your mind free from exposure to any impure non-cult sources.

Now, how does TheParty say you should respond to that? Run along and check.
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."

-- attributed to Communists Vladimir Lenin and Karl Marx, National Socialist Joseph Goebbels and sometimes even modern Leftist godfather Saul Alinsky...

...and Mammy does it in every post.
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
9,058
Reaction score
6,569
Points
2,050
It is clear you can't address the article at all, thus it is unchallenged.

Unchallenged is my point that "YOU MUST REFUTE ALL OF MY CONSPIRACY BLOG LINK!" is the tactic of a coward.

You've still provided no evidence to back up your claims. The fact that NASA GISS corrected their data just shows .... NASA GISS corrected their data. It does not show they engaged in any bad behavior, or that their current data is unreliable.

So, got anything else?

You write:

"Oh, READ MY LINK!

Your weepy butthurt tirades are painful to read. That's why nobody reads them.

They "corrected" their data over and over and over and over and over and over....., here more evidence that you didn't read the article since Tony addressed it specifically:

In 2004, NOAA showed that they were altering US temperatures by 0.5F since the year 1900, with no further charges after 1990.

1618372726884.png



But now they are altering the data by 2.0F.

1618372801139.png


The changes are MASSIVE, always favors in one direction upward every time.

Once again you have been smashed because you are one lazy ass!
 
Last edited:

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top