The Sound of Settled Science

[Weatherman2020]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

 

[BlackFlag]

 

[Crepitus]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

The veracity of the data is the biggest concern.

The paper shows that not only are the methods used suspect but that many of the measurements were so outrageous that they are useless.

Many of the data stations do indeed show evidence of making up data. I love the ones in Australia where summer time temps are recorded during southern hemisphere winter...

Its the minor adjustments which are much harder to see but if you take data sets from just 20 years ago and compare them to today you see the manipulations of alarmists all over the world.

The HSCR (Historical Surface Climate Record) is now so bastardized that it is useless and unreliable.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

5 year olds understand what a hyper link is. They can also tell you when it’s a paid subscription too. So go borrow your sisters kids for a day.

Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

 

[Weatherman2020]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

The veracity of the data is the biggest concern.

The paper shows that not only are the methods used suspect but that many of the measurements were so outrageous that they are useless.

Many of the data stations do indeed show evidence of making up data. I love the ones in Australia where summer time temps are recorded during southern hemisphere winter...

Its the minor adjustments which are much harder to see but if you take data sets from just 20 years ago and compare them to today you see the manipulations of alarmists all over the world.

The HSCR (Historical Surface Climate Record) is now so bastardized that it is useless and unreliable.

80C every day all summer and they used it. O.M.G.

(That’s 176F for you Leftards)

 

[SSDD]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

The veracity of the data is the biggest concern.

The paper shows that not only are the methods used suspect but that many of the measurements were so outrageous that they are useless.

Many of the data stations do indeed show evidence of making up data. I love the ones in Australia where summer time temps are recorded during southern hemisphere winter...

Its the minor adjustments which are much harder to see but if you take data sets from just 20 years ago and compare them to today you see the manipulations of alarmists all over the world.

The HSCR (Historical Surface Climate Record) is now so bastardized that it is useless and unreliable.

I've been pointing out and providing NOAA charts for years showing that the hottest places on earth, according to climate science, are invariably places with the least instrumental coverage allowing for infilling of data..in other words...just making it up as they go.

 

[Meister]

Obviously, close enough for government work.

 

[Crepitus]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

5 year olds understand what a hyper link is. They can also tell you when it’s a paid subscription too. So go borrow your sisters kids for a day.

Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

Hey idiot! I clicked your link. It has no supporting data, just as I said.

 

[SSDD]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

5 year olds understand what a hyper link is. They can also tell you when it’s a paid subscription too. So go borrow your sisters kids for a day.

Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

Hey idiot! I clicked your link. It has no supporting data, just as I said.

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you? He clearly said that it was behind a pay wall and that if you want the paper it will cost you $8.00.

Here is a link to the place it can be purchased.

Audit of the HadCRUT4 Global Temperature Dataset

By the way...the Met office has responded to the audit and claim that they will be correcting the errors in the next update. Interesting, isn't it, that it seems to always be skeptics pointing out the errors so rife in climate data...hockey sticks...and other aspects of data gymnastics carried out by well funded climate science.

Junk science is very easy to spot...why is it that skeptics have to be the ones constantly pointing it out?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

5 year olds understand what a hyper link is. They can also tell you when it’s a paid subscription too. So go borrow your sisters kids for a day.

Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

Hey idiot! I clicked your link. It has no supporting data, just as I said.

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you? He clearly said that it was behind a pay wall and that if you want the paper it will cost you $8.00.

Here is a link to the place it can be purchased.

Audit of the HadCRUT4 Global Temperature Dataset

By the way...the Met office has responded to the audit and claim that they will be correcting the errors in the next update. Interesting, isn't it, that it seems to always be skeptics pointing out the errors so rife in climate data...hockey sticks...and other aspects of data gymnastics carried out by well funded climate science.

Junk science is very easy to spot...why is it that skeptics have to be the ones constantly pointing it out?

They also responded positively to his 2016 paper showing errors on their Ocean datasets.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

While we can't say for certain how much the planet has warmed, what we know is that we have to surrender to One World Government

 

[Weatherman2020]

Celsius. Fahrenheit.
They’re all just numbers.

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C. For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth. Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened. The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland. The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data. For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia. Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853. This data appears to have been just made up.

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

5 year olds understand what a hyper link is. They can also tell you when it’s a paid subscription too. So go borrow your sisters kids for a day.

Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

Hey idiot! I clicked your link. It has no supporting data, just as I said.

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you? He clearly said that it was behind a pay wall and that if you want the paper it will cost you $8.00.

Here is a link to the place it can be purchased.

Audit of the HadCRUT4 Global Temperature Dataset

By the way...the Met office has responded to the audit and claim that they will be correcting the errors in the next update. Interesting, isn't it, that it seems to always be skeptics pointing out the errors so rife in climate data...hockey sticks...and other aspects of data gymnastics carried out by well funded climate science.

Junk science is very easy to spot...why is it that skeptics have to be the ones constantly pointing it out?

Didn't I just tell you not to be stupider than you have to be?

Says the ignorant Dufus who can’t figure out the hyperlink is to a paywall but lies he is a subscriber.

 

[SSDD]

Hilarious how your linked article squeels about an "independent audit" yet iffers .it one link to or quote from it. No mention of the agency conducting it, the materials reviewed, nothing but accusations.

5 year olds understand what a hyper link is. They can also tell you when it’s a paid subscription too. So go borrow your sisters kids for a day.

Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

Hey idiot! I clicked your link. It has no supporting data, just as I said.

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you? He clearly said that it was behind a pay wall and that if you want the paper it will cost you $8.00.

Here is a link to the place it can be purchased.

Audit of the HadCRUT4 Global Temperature Dataset

By the way...the Met office has responded to the audit and claim that they will be correcting the errors in the next update. Interesting, isn't it, that it seems to always be skeptics pointing out the errors so rife in climate data...hockey sticks...and other aspects of data gymnastics carried out by well funded climate science.

Junk science is very easy to spot...why is it that skeptics have to be the ones constantly pointing it out?

Didn't I just tell you not to be stupider than you have to be?

Says the ignorant Dufus who can’t figure out the hyperlink is to a paywall but lies he is a subscriber.

If you are going to be an AGW believer, and attempt to support your position, you simply have to be a liar...there is no way around it.

 

[Crick]

Says the man who pulls his physics from a child's fantasy story.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Says the man who pulls his physics from a child's fantasy story.

Tell us more how humans can change sex on a whim, Mr Science.

 

[SSDD]

Says the man who pulls his physics from a child's fantasy story.

Still waiting on a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...you can't produce it because none exists...feel free to prove me wrong by posting a single piece of such data.

My bet is that you won't..because you can't...because it doesn't exist...now prove me right by not posting a single shred of observed measured data which supports AGW over natural variability.

 

[Crick]

No matter what evidence I or anyone else have or will put up here, you will simply repeat the above bullshit mantra. AR1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are filled with thousands of pages of observed, measured evidence supporting the AGW theory over natural variability. You are a fool and a liar. AGW is real, accepted science.

 

[Billy_Bob]

No matter what evidence I or anyone else have or will put up here, you will simply repeat the above bullshit mantra. AR1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are filled with thousands of pages of observed, measured evidence supporting the AGW theory over natural variability. You are a fool and a liar. AGW is real, accepted science.

You cant tell the difference between model output and empirically observed evidence. The IPCC shares your affliction..

 

[Crick]

I'm quite certain the IPCC and the thousands of degreed researchers whose work they assess know the difference between models and observation. That deniers should have universally adopted the strategy of rejecting all models is simply evidence that none of you are interested in the truth. There is no way to investigate what will happen in the future without use of a model. Certainly, a model can be wrong but the assumption that all models are wrong and that none have value is simply bullshit.