Cherry Picking the data: the wall continues to crumble

[cpwill]

...Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

In the 1970s, nearly 600 Canadian weather stations fed surface temperature readings into a global database assembled by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Today, NOAA only collects data from 35 stations across Canada.

Worse, only one station -- at Eureka on Ellesmere Island -- is now used by NOAA as a temperature gauge for all Canadian territory above the Arctic Circle. The Canadian government, meanwhile, operates 1,400 surface weather stations across the country, and more than 100 above the Arctic Circle, according to Environment Canada...

...“NOAA systematically eliminated 75% of the world’s stations with a clear bias towards removing higher latitude, high altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be cooler,” the authors say. “The thermometers in a sense, marched towards the tropics, the sea, and to airport tarmacs.”...

 

[cpwill]

Canadian Scientist Andrew Weaver

A senior Canadian climate scientist says the United Nations' panel on global warming has become tainted by political advocacy, that its chairman should resign, and that its approach to science should be overhauled.

...The damage to the IPCC's credibility caused by the "glaciergate" affair, and by last December's "climategate" scandal, have provided months of fodder for critics who have long been skeptical of the IPCC's warnings.

Weaver says Pachauri, the panel's chairman, should resign, not only for his recent failings but because he was a poor choice to lead the IPCC to begin with....

 

[AgentM]

It's funny how climate change skeptics cherry pick the few screw ups that happen here and there, and then claim the other side is cherry picking.

Also, that Weaver guy is from my university!

 

[Gill]

It's funny how climate change skeptics cherry pick the few screw ups that happen here and there, and then claim the other side is cherry picking.

Also, that Weaver guy is from my university!

So you're ok with one temperature recording station being the standard for a huge area of your country??

Despite the fact that there are many others in that region?

Despite the fact that this station is in a known warm area of that region?

 

[Z3n]

The scientific community is in almost unanimous agreement, its the politicization that is whats becoming so whack.


Almost every single dip or cooling cycle in temperature data is the result of El Nino, or volcanic activity. or other negative feedback loops that cool the earth.

Simple equation: x is population.
Xy is population times exponential growth.

x -> z, x creates some impact on the environment, just by emitting carbon through breathing or pollution by fossil fuels etc

xy-> more z?

Even if you dont believe in global warming, it would make sense that population explosions and environmental issues like desertification, pollution, scarcity of resources etc are increasing.....

 

[ptif219]

It's funny how climate change skeptics cherry pick the few screw ups that happen here and there, and then claim the other side is cherry picking.

Also, that Weaver guy is from my university!

Few screw ups. It makes the data false and shows the data was fudged to get a certain answer not what the actual data showed.

 

[ptif219]

The scientific community is in almost unanimous agreement, its the politicization that is whats becoming so whack.


Almost every single dip or cooling cycle in temperature data is the result of El Nino, or volcanic activity. or other negative feedback loops that cool the earth.

Simple equation: x is population.
Xy is population times exponential growth.

x -> z, x creates some impact on the environment, just by emitting carbon through breathing or pollution by fossil fuels etc

xy-> more z?

Even if you dont believe in global warming, it would make sense that population explosions and environmental issues like desertification, pollution, scarcity of resources etc are increasing.....

Has nothing to do with the sun or lack of sunspot activity?

 

[AgentM]

Has nothing to do with the sun or lack of sunspot activity?

So all these climate change scientists would know nothing about sunspot activity, but you do? :lol:

 

[AgentM]

The scientific community is in almost unanimous agreement, its the politicization that is whats becoming so whack.

I agree, the IPCC and associated bodies should try to avoid politicization whenever possible.

 

[Gill]

The scientific community is in almost unanimous agreement, its the politicization that is whats becoming so whack.


Almost every single dip or cooling cycle in temperature data is the result of El Nino, or volcanic activity. or other negative feedback loops that cool the earth.

Simple equation: x is population.
Xy is population times exponential growth.

x -> z, x creates some impact on the environment, just by emitting carbon through breathing or pollution by fossil fuels etc

xy-> more z?

Even if you dont believe in global warming, it would make sense that population explosions and environmental issues like desertification, pollution, scarcity of resources etc are increasing.....

Every DIP in temperature is due to El Nino or volcanic activity???

So you believe that every drop in temp has a natural cause, but every rise is due to man??? :roll:

And who is cherry picking data???

 

[Z3n]

Every DIP in temperature is due to El Nino or volcanic activity???

So you believe that every drop in temp has a natural cause, but every rise is due to man??? :roll:

And who is cherry picking data???

im saying a lot of dips recently; 1991(mt pinatubo) was the eruption of a volcano and 1998 was El Nino, both which are reported as cooling cycles.

And it makes logical sense that as population increases, the amount of impact any human activity will have will increase. It's not a radical concept.

 

[AgentM]

Every DIP in temperature is due to El Nino or volcanic activity???

So you believe that every drop in temp has a natural cause, but every rise is due to man??? :roll:

And who is cherry picking data???

Apparently you can't think long term. Besides, "Global Warming" is really the dumbed down name for climate change that people attached to it to help people understand it easier. Overall climate change doesn't mean that there won't be ups and downs in temperatures, but that overall temperatures are rising and the evidence is that a great deal of that is due to man made causes.

But people like you think that one really bad winter "disproves" the entire climate change model, when it really doesn't. Basically the science of climate change's biggest fight is against ignorance, or pure stubbornness. :roll:

 

[ptif219]

So all these climate change scientists would know nothing about sunspot activity, but you do? :lol:

They ignore it like they do temp stations that don't fit their agenda

 

[gopman]

And it makes logical sense that as population increases, the amount of impact any human activity will have will increase. It's not a radical concept.

And since 2% of greenhouse gas is CO2, and some of that is created by humans, it is totally 100% logical that this population increase translates to global warming.

 

[Gill]

Apparently you can't think long term. Besides, "Global Warming" is really the dumbed down name for climate change that people attached to it to help people understand it easier. Overall climate change doesn't mean that there won't be ups and downs in temperatures, but that overall temperatures are rising and the evidence is that a great deal of that is due to man made causes.

But people like you think that one really bad winter "disproves" the entire climate change model, when it really doesn't. Basically the science of climate change's biggest fight is against ignorance, or pure stubbornness. :roll:

Consider yourself challenged...

Where do I claim that "one really bad winter" disproves climate change??

I'll be waiting.

 

[Z3n]

And since 2% of greenhouse gas is CO2, and some of that is created by humans, it is totally 100% logical that this population increase translates to global warming.

Well, if CO2 causes global warming, and the amount, however small, is increasing over time due to population trends.

Um YES?

 

[Gill]

So all these climate change scientists would know nothing about sunspot activity, but you do? :lol:

There are a large number of scientists that have written papers on the affect of sunspot activity and climate. Didn't you know that??

 

[gopman]

Well, if CO2 causes global warming, and the amount, however small, is increasing over time due to population trends.

Um YES?

So the other 99.5% couldn't possibly have anything to do with it?

 

[Z3n]

So the other 99.5% couldn't possibly have anything to do with it?

if the 99.5 is constant(or a lot more stable than human activity), and the .5% "man made" Co2 emission is increasing over time... then uh, you still have warming...

 

[AgentM]

There are a large number of scientists that have written papers on the affect of sunspot activity and climate. Didn't you know that??

Sure sunspots might have some minor effect on climate, but have they shown that it disproves the rest of climatology?

 

[Gill]

im saying a lot of dips recently; 1991(mt pinatubo) was the eruption of a volcano and 1998 was El Nino, both which are reported as cooling cycles.

And it makes logical sense that as population increases, the amount of impact any human activity will have will increase. It's not a radical concept.

El Nino is associated with warmer temperatures, not cooler. That's why 1998 was so warm. Mt. Pinatubo cooled temperatures for only 2 - 3 years.

 

[Gill]

Sure sunspots might have some minor effect on climate, but have they shown that it disproves the rest of climatology?

The rest of what climatology???

I'm still waiting..........

 

[Z3n]

El Nino is associated with warmer temperatures, not cooler. That's why 1998 was so warm. Mt. Pinatubo cooled temperatures for only 2 - 3 years.

No, El Nino is a negative feedback system.

 

[gopman]

if the 99.5 is constant(or a lot more stable than human activity), and the .5% "man made" Co2 emission is increasing over time... then uh, you still have warming...

So there's no possible explanation for the climate of Earth other than this fraction of a percent of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Now lets combine that with some fudged numbers. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a scientific fact.

 

[Orion]

Middleground, you around?

We predicted this would happen. Another carbon copy thread once the other one was refuted.

Typical.