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

[skookerasbil]

Top scientists start to examine fiddled global warming figures
The Global Warming Policy Foundation has enlisted an international team of five distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry

Top scientists start to examine fiddled global warming figures - Telegraph

Oooooops............more bad news for the AGW k00ks!!! They didn't need this are a time when already nobody is giving a rats ass.

 

[skookerasbil]

Gigantor time???

 

[Billy_Bob]

Top scientists start to examine fiddled global warming figures
The Global Warming Policy Foundation has enlisted an international team of five distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry

Top scientists start to examine fiddled global warming figures - Telegraph

Oooooops............more bad news for the AGW k00ks!!! They didn't need this are a time when already nobody is giving a rats ass.

This one is going to hurt the socialist agenda... exposing the lie right before a US presidential election...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Before Adjustment...

And Below is AFTER Adjustment....

The very basic data shows the severity of the manipulation and LIEs by alarmists and their agenda. This will not end well for the alarmists.

 

[cnm]

On and on it goes. Oh well, one group of flat earthers will again find the earth is actually round but will be ignored by the other flat earthers. Nothing to see here, move along...

The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism

http://www.wsj.com

Are you a global warming skeptic? There are plenty of good reasons why you might be.

As many as 757 stations in the United States recorded net surface-temperature cooling over the past century. Many are concentrated in the southeast, where some people attribute tornadoes and hurricanes to warming.

The temperature-station quality is largely awful. The most important stations in the U.S. are included in the Department of Energy's Historical Climatology Network. A careful survey of these stations by a team led by meteorologist Anthony Watts showed that 70% of these stations have such poor siting that, by the U.S. government's own measure, they result in temperature uncertainties of between two and five degrees Celsius or more. We do not know how much worse are the stations in the developing world. [...]

Without good answers to all these complaints, global-warming skepticism seems sensible. But now let me explain why you should not be a skeptic, at least not any longer.

Over the last two years, the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project has looked deeply at all the issues raised above. I chaired our group, which just submitted four detailed papers on our results to peer-reviewed journals. We have now posted these papers online at Berkeley Earth to solicit even more scrutiny. [...]

When we began our study, we felt that skeptics had raised legitimate issues, and we didn't know what we'd find. Our results turned out to be close to those published by prior groups. We think that means that those groups had truly been very careful in their work, despite their inability to convince some skeptics of that. They managed to avoid bias in their data selection, homogenization and other corrections.​

 

[Zander]

But. but, but, the consensus?

 

[westwall]

On and on it goes. Oh well, one group of flat earthers will again find the earth is actually round but will be ignored by the other flat earthers. Nothing to see here, move along...

The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism

http://www.wsj.com

Are you a global warming skeptic? There are plenty of good reasons why you might be.

As many as 757 stations in the United States recorded net surface-temperature cooling over the past century. Many are concentrated in the southeast, where some people attribute tornadoes and hurricanes to warming.

The temperature-station quality is largely awful. The most important stations in the U.S. are included in the Department of Energy's Historical Climatology Network. A careful survey of these stations by a team led by meteorologist Anthony Watts showed that 70% of these stations have such poor siting that, by the U.S. government's own measure, they result in temperature uncertainties of between two and five degrees Celsius or more. We do not know how much worse are the stations in the developing world. [...]

Without good answers to all these complaints, global-warming skepticism seems sensible. But now let me explain why you should not be a skeptic, at least not any longer.

Over the last two years, the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project has looked deeply at all the issues raised above. I chaired our group, which just submitted four detailed papers on our results to peer-reviewed journals. We have now posted these papers online at Berkeley Earth to solicit even more scrutiny. [...]

When we began our study, we felt that skeptics had raised legitimate issues, and we didn't know what we'd find. Our results turned out to be close to those published by prior groups. We think that means that those groups had truly been very careful in their work, despite their inability to convince some skeptics of that. They managed to avoid bias in their data selection, homogenization and other corrections.​

That's funny. It isn't the "deniers" who are falsifying data. That seems to be the flat earther AGW supporters who are trying to hide the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Who knew!

 

[Old Rocks]

The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is the United Kingdom's most high-profile climate denier group. It opposes action to mitigate climate change. Founded by Nigel Lawson,[1] it is a registered educational charity "deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated" to mitigate global warming.[2]

Although founder Lawson claims to accept that anthropogenic global warming is occurring, this acceptance appears to be "considerably less than half-hearted;"[3] the GWPF webpage banner image sports a short-term (2001-2010) temperature graph (blue, below) giving the appearance that the world is not warming.

Funding not transparent; just 1.6% comes from memberships
The Global Warming Policy Foundation does not reveal where its funding comes from.[6] In their first years accounts they say "the soil we till is highly controversial, and anyone who puts their head above the parapet has to be prepared to endure a degree of public vilification. For that reason we offer all our donors the protection of anonymity".[7] The accounts show the extent to which the secretive Foundation is funded by anonymous donors, compared with income from membership fees. Its total income for the period up to 31 July 2010 was £503,302, of which only £8,168 (or 1.6%) came from membership contributions. The foundation charges a minimum annual membership fee of £100.[8]

In 2012, the Guardian exposed Lawson's links to coal-fired power companies in Europe.[9]

Global Warming Policy Foundation - SourceWatch

Might just as well put the Koch Bros. name on what those people will say.

 

[westwall]

The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is the United Kingdom's most high-profile climate denier group. It opposes action to mitigate climate change. Founded by Nigel Lawson,[1] it is a registered educational charity "deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated" to mitigate global warming.[2]

Although founder Lawson claims to accept that anthropogenic global warming is occurring, this acceptance appears to be "considerably less than half-hearted;"[3] the GWPF webpage banner image sports a short-term (2001-2010) temperature graph (blue, below) giving the appearance that the world is not warming.

Funding not transparent; just 1.6% comes from memberships
The Global Warming Policy Foundation does not reveal where its funding comes from.[6] In their first years accounts they say "the soil we till is highly controversial, and anyone who puts their head above the parapet has to be prepared to endure a degree of public vilification. For that reason we offer all our donors the protection of anonymity".[7] The accounts show the extent to which the secretive Foundation is funded by anonymous donors, compared with income from membership fees. Its total income for the period up to 31 July 2010 was £503,302, of which only £8,168 (or 1.6%) came from membership contributions. The foundation charges a minimum annual membership fee of £100.[8]

In 2012, the Guardian exposed Lawson's links to coal-fired power companies in Europe.[9]

Global Warming Policy Foundation - SourceWatch

Might just as well put the Koch Bros. name on what those people will say.

Wow, really. How about showing the sources of funding for the skeptical science website you love so much. Or how about any other site that supports AGW bullshit. Face it silly person all sides have money from advocates. Funny how you whine and snivel when it's a group you don't like but it's A-OK for a group you do.

Now....what are those kind of people called????? Assholes? No, that's not it....ahh yeah...HYPOCRITICAL ASSHOLES! YEAH! That's the ticket!

 

[cnm]

That's funny. It isn't the "deniers" who are falsifying data. That seems to be the flat earther AGW supporters who are trying to hide the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Who knew!

Well it is the 'deniers' falsifying data. 'No warming for the last 10-15-18 years', what bullshit.

And when the actual temperature data is inspected again and again and again, the answer is always the same, 'yes, they were right' and is always ignored by the flat earthers. No worries, invincible ignorance is in fact invincible.

 

[Zander]

Globull Warming explained in 45 seconds.....

 

[westwall]

That's funny. It isn't the "deniers" who are falsifying data. That seems to be the flat earther AGW supporters who are trying to hide the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Who knew!

Well it is the 'deniers' falsifying data. 'No warming for the last 10-15-18 years', what bullshit.

And when the actual temperature data is inspected again and again and again, the answer is always the same, 'yes, they were right' and is always ignored by the flat earthers. No worries, invincible ignorance is in fact invincible.

Ummm, no it isn't. The "deniers" don't have access to it. See how that works? No, no you probably don't.

 

[orogenicman]

That's funny. It isn't the "deniers" who are falsifying data. That seems to be the flat earther AGW supporters who are trying to hide the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Who knew!

Well it is the 'deniers' falsifying data. 'No warming for the last 10-15-18 years', what bullshit.

And when the actual temperature data is inspected again and again and again, the answer is always the same, 'yes, they were right' and is always ignored by the flat earthers. No worries, invincible ignorance is in fact invincible.

Ummm, no it isn't. The "deniers" don't have access to it. See how that works? No, no you probably don't.

If you are suggesting that you or I don't have access to climate data, I am going to call you on your bullshit.

Ready?












Bullshit.

 

[westwall]

That's funny. It isn't the "deniers" who are falsifying data. That seems to be the flat earther AGW supporters who are trying to hide the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Who knew!

Well it is the 'deniers' falsifying data. 'No warming for the last 10-15-18 years', what bullshit.

And when the actual temperature data is inspected again and again and again, the answer is always the same, 'yes, they were right' and is always ignored by the flat earthers. No worries, invincible ignorance is in fact invincible.

Ummm, no it isn't. The "deniers" don't have access to it. See how that works? No, no you probably don't.

If you are suggesting that you or I don't have access to climate data, I am going to call you on your bullshit.

Ready?












Bullshit.

It's called access to the raw data you imbecile. I don't have access and neither do you. What a simpleton.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ol' Walleyes constantly tells lies like that. And then claims to be a member of the AGU and the Royal Society. And turns right around and tell all that the other scientists in the AGU and the Royal Society are all liars. I have posted videos of the presentations at the annual AGU meeting in San Francisco since 2009. And Walleyes has constantly accused the scientists of being liars and whores. I think Walleyes prefered peer level is Billy Boob and Frankie Boy.

 

[Zander]

Here is the raw data.......

 

[Old Rocks]

I do believe that Muller has made all the data he looked at accessable. Not that you would ever acknowledge that.

 

[orogenicman]

That's funny. It isn't the "deniers" who are falsifying data. That seems to be the flat earther AGW supporters who are trying to hide the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Who knew!

Well it is the 'deniers' falsifying data. 'No warming for the last 10-15-18 years', what bullshit.

And when the actual temperature data is inspected again and again and again, the answer is always the same, 'yes, they were right' and is always ignored by the flat earthers. No worries, invincible ignorance is in fact invincible.

Ummm, no it isn't. The "deniers" don't have access to it. See how that works? No, no you probably don't.

If you are suggesting that you or I don't have access to climate data, I am going to call you on your bullshit.

Ready?












Bullshit.

It's called access to the raw data you imbecile. I don't have access and neither do you. What a simpleton.

Yes you do and so do I. All you have to do is contact relevant original source climate data centers and request of the data. Now, whether or not you have access to proprietary data is another matter (if you don't want to pay for it, that's your problem). The fact is the bulk of the data is readily available, much of it online. For instance, all climate data for the State of Kentucky is readily available for all stations in the Commonwealth free of charge online. Most of these centers are more than eager to assist you in getting whatever data you need.

Kentucky Climate Center - Data Sources

 

[cnm]

It's called access to the raw data you imbecile. I don't have access and neither do you. What a simpleton.

Berkeley Earth data

Berkeley Earth source files

 

[ScienceRocks]

Ol' Walleyes constantly tells lies like that. And then claims to be a member of the AGU and the Royal Society. And turns right around and tell all that the other scientists in the AGU and the Royal Society are all liars. I have posted videos of the presentations at the annual AGU meeting in San Francisco since 2009. And Walleyes has constantly accused the scientists of being liars and whores. I think Walleyes prefered peer level is Billy Boob and Frankie Boy.

And not only that he/she wants to defund all of our scientific infrastructure and go back to the basement. Yeah, that's the ticket,,,lets go from number one to number 100! How could any real scientist even say such a thing?