• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NOAA questionable background

ricksfolly

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
2,236
Reaction score
232
Location
Grand Junction, CO 81506
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The NOAA claim their records go back a hundred years, but they started in 1970, so why should data they had no control over from 1910 to 1970 be even considered?

ricksfolly
 

Hoplite

Technomancer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
1,077
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Because it's better than nothing, and why would data that the NOAA didnt personally collect be suspect?
 

ricksfolly

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
2,236
Reaction score
232
Location
Grand Junction, CO 81506
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Because it's better than nothing, and why would data that the NOAA didnt personally collect be suspect?

Better than nothing isn't an exact science.

It's vitally important to have direct contact with any data source, especially if you're not familiar with the person who processed it.

That's standard Operating procedure (SOP).

ricksfolly
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,847
Reaction score
33,760
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who cares?

So, they say that the record high for this day was tada in 1880, when it was actually a degree different, due to faulty record keeping before NOAA was established.

so what?
 

Hoplite

Technomancer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
1,077
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Better than nothing isn't an exact science.

It's vitally important to have direct contact with any data source, especially if you're not familiar with the person who processed it.

That's standard Operating procedure (SOP).

ricksfolly
So what would your suggestion be? Ignore pertinent data because we cant interview the person who gathered it?

If you can come up with a concrete reason why we shouldnt trust pre-NOAA data, then I'll support you. But if all you have is "We cant fire the person who gathered it if it's off" then I cant do anything to help you
 
Top Bottom