« Shoe Night Light | Home | Prada Paperclip Money Clip »

July 13, 2017

Is Global Warming Real?


This happened this week.

You be the judge.

July 13, 2017 at 12:01 PM | Permalink


Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not?

My argument goes to the heart of the matter.

The point is that the data do not support any conclusion. To say they do is to lie.

One example:
In 1900, the reporting station for Dallas, Texas, was the train station located downtown. The instrument used was a mercury thermometer. A station employee went outside, eyed the temperature, and wrote it down. With what precision? A degree? Half a degree? Who knows? I don't. Nor do you. Nor does anyone else.

In 1948, the reporting station for Dallas, Texas, moved 12 miles from downtown to Love Field, the city airport. Now the temperature was recorded mechanically, not for weather purposes but because pressure altitude makes a difference in the performance of airplanes. What was the precision of the measuring instrument? Was the temperature at Love Field identical with the train station downtown? No. As Dallas grew, the space around Love Field was paved over and the ambient temperature rose.

In 1974, the reporting station for Dallas, Texas, moved from Love Field to DFW International Airport (the worst designed airport in the world), 40 miles from downtown. Now the temperature was recorded electronically and reported constantly, because pressure altitude is vitally important to jets. What is the precision of the measuring instrument? As with Love Field, the land around DFW is being paved over. What effect does this have on reported temperature? No one suggests that it has a cooling effect.

Is the downtown Dallas train station identical to Love Field or DFW Airport? No. Are the measuring instruments identical? No. Are the precisions of the measuring instruments identical? No. Are the measurements comparable? No. Conflating these measurements is flim-flam.

The data problem is worse with proxies. Use of proxies requires assumptions and corrections. Comparing proxy measurements to electronically gathered measurements is a sure sign of flim-flam.

The data the warmists are using do not support any conclusion. They may be right. They may be wrong. But there is no method by which a silk purse can be made from this pig's ear of data.

I remind you that 40 years ago 'climate scientists' warned us that New York City would be under ice by the year 2000. Explain to me why they were wrong then but they are right now.

This blind acceptance of a cult of sogenannte science happened before. One hundred years ago. Worldwide. Including the United States. It was called eugenics. Took a world war to wipe out the worst of it. It will probably take a world war to wipe out this man-made global warming witchery.

Posted by: antares | Jul 14, 2017 8:59:41 PM

Unfortunately Antares your claim to know what you are talking about is specious. If you did know you would realise your arguments are irrelevant.

It is not the temperature per se that is the problem, it is the rate by which it is rising, unprecedented in geological time and only one reason is obvious.

Do your research please

Posted by: Phil Ross | Jul 13, 2017 7:37:43 PM

Yes, global warming is real, and thanks be to God for it, else this planet would be 18 degrees Celsius cooler all day every day. It was warmer 100 million years ago (fossils on the north shore of Alaska). It was warmer 2,500 years ago (North Africa -- now Tunisia and Algeria -- was covered in forests and farmed for grain) (in case you did not know, warmer = wetter). It was warmer 1,000 years ago when Viking farmed the eastern shore of Greenland and grapes grew in Northumbria and Vinland.

That is not the question.

The question is precisely how much do human actions contribute to global warming. You cannot get the correct answer from warmists because they conflate data from different sources and ignore changed conditions in reporting stations. What I am telling you is the input data are garbage. The results that come from such garbage are inherently flawed.

Let me make it abundantly clear. The results are bullshit.

(FWIW I was a professional statistician. I know whereof I speak.)

Posted by: antares | Jul 13, 2017 4:15:44 PM

Post a comment