Remember me
▼ Content

July 2020 - Feeling the Heat?



Page 2 of 2<12
09-08-2020 20:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7465)
HarveyH55 wrote:Temperature from land based monitoring stations, comes from where the most people live. Most people prefer a warmer climate, so the are more monitoring stations in those areas.

Excellent observation. I remember learning that Canada is the world's third largest country ... yet Canadians don't leverage all the space, preferring instead to all squeeze together into high population densities in the south relatively close to the US. It's not that they hate fresh air, clean skies, open spaces and beautiful scenery ... it just that they try to avoid cold as much as anyone.



I notice that the Arctic is NOT very popular amongst Canadians and they aren't rushing to fill northern Canada with monitoring stations. The south, yes. The north, no.

Great point.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-08-2020 14:19
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(304)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Temperature from land based monitoring stations, comes from where the most people live. Most people prefer a warmer climate, so the are more monitoring stations in those areas. We have a lot of people, and a lot of extreme weather in the tropics. There are a lot more weather monitoring stations.


If you are implying that this biases the average temperature, that is wrong. The data is re-gridded to uniform areas (say, 500 sq km) and the average of all the stations in that area are taken. If there is a large conurbation in that grid the effect is calculated and allowed for. A comparison of average US temperatures was calculated independently using only urban sites and only rural sites. The result was the same to 0.01C. Showing that their correction algorithms are very good.

Not clear that most people prefer warm weather. The difference is between unusually hotter and warm weather. Most people live in the temperate zone (above 23 degrees in latitude), not in the tropics.


Satellite temperature measurements essentially are derived from camera images. Water vapor, dust clouds, volcanic ash, will screw those numbers up some. Don't remember how many miles away, those weather satellites are measuring from, but they aren't accurate, 100% of the time, but averaging those readings in, with the land based readings, smooth them out some...


Different wavelength images are used to avoid effects from water vapor, dust, volcanoes, etc.

The satellites orbit at altitudes from about 800 km (polar orbiting satellites) to 35,000 km (geosync) for the GOES satellites
10-08-2020 16:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7465)
DRKTS wrote:If you are implying that this biases the average temperature, that is wrong.

Of course all measurement bias translates directly into statistical error. You must be mathematically incompetent to believe otherwise.

DRKTS wrote: The data is re-gridded to uniform areas (say, 500 sq km)

In English this means you fudge the schit out of the data and then provide whatever additional numbers you require to arrive at your desired predetermined result. The technical term for this is "utter dishonesty" and is pushed by dishonest purveyors of Global Warming (yes, yes, ... it's totally redundant, I know).

DRKTS wrote: If there is a large conurbation in that grid the effect is calculated and allowed for.

... which necessarily involves assumptions of unknown accuracy, i.e. you are making schit up and then using that as a basis for making schit up.

The whole process you are describing is shady and is not allowed to occur in science, engineering or IT. Any reasonable adult can understand that no one is going to invest millions of dollars into a project whose success will rest on data fabricated by mathematically incompetent clowns.

Of course your particular type of clown act is used all the time in cult religions that target the gullible and who, like you, are desperate to be perceived as being "smart" somehow. I just think you should be honest in a forum such as Climate-Debate and announce full disclosure that you are asking for people to join your ideology and that your "data" is not resultant from standard statistical processes. I realize that I'm asking for honesty from you and that you find honesty to be totally unacceptable but I just wanted to go on record as officially recommending you ditch the lying.

DRKTS wrote: A comparison of average US temperatures was calculated independently using only urban sites and only rural sites. The result was the same to 0.01C. Showing that their correction algorithms are very good.

Only if you assume that your previous assumptions are accurate. What would be your result if you were to assume that your previous assumptions were inaccurate? Then your "correction algorithm" becomes less accurate. You have absolutely no idea how accurate your "correction algorithm" is, completely ignoring the fact that absolutely no "correction algorithms" are allowed in science, engineering or IT industries.

It is required that the raw data, unaltered, unfudged, unmutilated, unfabricated and unmodified be published.

I love to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to find spurious excuses to avoid simply posting your raw data ... and to squirm out from under providing a clear, unambiguous definition of Climate. You clearly don't have any valid raw data otherwise you wouldn't go to such great lengths to bury your mix of fabricated and random data beneath layers of fraudulent processes.

DRKTS wrote: Not clear that most people prefer warm weather.

Right. I notice the rush to abandon Rio and flock down towards Antarctica.



Hey, look at Sweden. I bet Kiruna real estate is booming.



What about Russia? Do you think the Русские are buying vacation homes in northern Russia?


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-08-2020 19:03
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(304)
IBdaMann wrote:
DRKTS wrote:If you are implying that this biases the average temperature, that is wrong.

Of course all measurement bias translates directly into statistical error. You must be mathematically incompetent to believe otherwise.

DRKTS wrote: The data is re-gridded to uniform areas (say, 500 sq km)

In English this means you fudge the schit out of the data and then provide whatever additional numbers you require to arrive at your desired predetermined result. The technical term for this is "utter dishonesty" and is pushed by dishonest purveyors of Global Warming (yes, yes, ... it's totally redundant, I know).

DRKTS wrote: If there is a large conurbation in that grid the effect is calculated and allowed for.

... which necessarily involves assumptions of unknown accuracy, i.e. you are making schit up and then using that as a basis for making schit up.

The whole process you are describing is shady and is not allowed to occur in science, engineering or IT. Any reasonable adult can understand that no one is going to invest millions of dollars into a project whose success will rest on data fabricated by mathematically incompetent clowns.

Of course your particular type of clown act is used all the time in cult religions that target the gullible and who, like you, are desperate to be perceived as being "smart" somehow. I just think you should be honest in a forum such as Climate-Debate and announce full disclosure that you are asking for people to join your ideology and that your "data" is not resultant from standard statistical processes. I realize that I'm asking for honesty from you and that you find honesty to be totally unacceptable but I just wanted to go on record as officially recommending you ditch the lying.

DRKTS wrote: A comparison of average US temperatures was calculated independently using only urban sites and only rural sites. The result was the same to 0.01C. Showing that their correction algorithms are very good.

Only if you assume that your previous assumptions are accurate. What would be your result if you were to assume that your previous assumptions were inaccurate? Then your "correction algorithm" becomes less accurate. You have absolutely no idea how accurate your "correction algorithm" is, completely ignoring the fact that absolutely no "correction algorithms" are allowed in science, engineering or IT industries.

It is required that the raw data, unaltered, unfudged, unmutilated, unfabricated and unmodified be published.

I love to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to find spurious excuses to avoid simply posting your raw data ... and to squirm out from under providing a clear, unambiguous definition of Climate. You clearly don't have any valid raw data otherwise you wouldn't go to such great lengths to bury your mix of fabricated and random data beneath layers of fraudulent processes.

DRKTS wrote: Not clear that most people prefer warm weather.

Right. I notice the rush to abandon Rio and flock down towards Antarctica.



Hey, look at Sweden. I bet Kiruna real estate is booming.



What about Russia? Do you think the Русские are buying vacation homes in northern Russia?


.


delusional
10-08-2020 21:23
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★☆
(1214)
DRKTS wrote:delusional

That you are.
11-08-2020 00:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13295)
DRKTS wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Temperature from land based monitoring stations, comes from where the most people live. Most people prefer a warmer climate, so the are more monitoring stations in those areas. We have a lot of people, and a lot of extreme weather in the tropics. There are a lot more weather monitoring stations.


If you are implying that this biases the average temperature, that is wrong.
Lie. Location grouping is significant. Thermometers MUST be uniformly placed.
DRKTS wrote:
The data is re-gridded to uniform areas (say, 500 sq km)
Nope. You can't. That is manufacturing data, presenting a 'temperature reading' where there was no thermometer.
DRKTS wrote:
and the average of all the stations in that area are taken.
Nope. That is cooking data. No allowed.
DRKTS wrote:
If there is a large conurbation in that grid the effect is calculated and allowed for.
Nope. You can't use cooked data in statistical math. You can't use biased data in statistical math either. Mantras 25d...25e.
DRKTS wrote:
A comparison of average US temperatures was calculated independently using only urban sites and only rural sites.
Never made. You are making shit up again.
DRKTS wrote:
The result was the same to 0.01C.
Nope. Random number. Argument from randU fallacy. Mantra 25g.
DRKTS wrote:
Showing that their correction algorithms are very good.
You cannot use cooked data in statistical math. Your 'proof' is invalid. Comparing random numbers is not a proof.
DRKTS wrote:
Not clear that most people prefer warm weather.
I suggest you observe the numbers of tourists (under non-Covid conditions) that prefer to visit Hawaii, warm beaches, Mexico, and the Caribbean rather than then northern Alaska or the South Pole, or the so-called 'snow birds' that commute to vacation homes in warmer climates in the winter. You should visit Lake Havasu City sometime during January. The place is packed. Then visit it in July. The place is like a ghost town.
DRKTS wrote:
The difference is between unusually hotter and warm weather.
Nope. People like warmer weather.
DRKTS wrote:
Most people live in the temperate zone (above 23 degrees in latitude), not in the tropics.

The tropic line is at 23.5 deg latitude on both sides of the equator. That is north of 23 deg latitude.

Most people live in southern China, followed closely by India. Both of these are warmer subtropical areas or desert. Most people in the United States live along the gulf coast or on either coast, where ocean temperatures tend to help limit how cold it gets. They heat their homes too. People like to be warm.

DRKTS wrote:
Satellite temperature measurements essentially are derived from camera images. Water vapor, dust clouds, volcanic ash, will screw those numbers up some. Don't remember how many miles away, those weather satellites are measuring from, but they aren't accurate, 100% of the time, but averaging those readings in, with the land based readings, smooth them out some...


Different wavelength images are used to avoid effects from water vapor, dust, volcanoes, etc.

Irrelevant. Satellites are incapable of measuring absolute temperature. They can only measure light. The emissivity of Earth is unknown. Satellites are also incapable of measuring a global ocean level. There is no valid reference point.
DRKTS wrote:
The satellites orbit at altitudes from about 800 km (polar orbiting satellites) to 35,000 km (geosync) for the GOES satellites

Irrelevant.

No argument presented. Use of Magick Satellite. Denial of math. Denial of instrumentation. Denial of science. Holy Pronouncements.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
11-08-2020 01:18
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7465)
DRKTS wrote:delusional

You are calling the population maps that I lifted off the internet "delusional."

This episode of Sesame Street is brought to you by the words "snowflake" and "loser" ... and the unfudged, unfabricated and unmodified number "3."




A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-08-2020 01:21
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
DRKTS wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
DRKTS wrote:If you are implying that this biases the average temperature, that is wrong.

Of course all measurement bias translates directly into statistical error. You must be mathematically incompetent to believe otherwise.

DRKTS wrote: The data is re-gridded to uniform areas (say, 500 sq km)

In English this means you fudge the schit out of the data and then provide whatever additional numbers you require to arrive at your desired predetermined result. The technical term for this is "utter dishonesty" and is pushed by dishonest purveyors of Global Warming (yes, yes, ... it's totally redundant, I know).

DRKTS wrote: If there is a large conurbation in that grid the effect is calculated and allowed for.

... which necessarily involves assumptions of unknown accuracy, i.e. you are making schit up and then using that as a basis for making schit up.

The whole process you are describing is shady and is not allowed to occur in science, engineering or IT. Any reasonable adult can understand that no one is going to invest millions of dollars into a project whose success will rest on data fabricated by mathematically incompetent clowns.

Of course your particular type of clown act is used all the time in cult religions that target the gullible and who, like you, are desperate to be perceived as being "smart" somehow. I just think you should be honest in a forum such as Climate-Debate and announce full disclosure that you are asking for people to join your ideology and that your "data" is not resultant from standard statistical processes. I realize that I'm asking for honesty from you and that you find honesty to be totally unacceptable but I just wanted to go on record as officially recommending you ditch the lying.

DRKTS wrote: A comparison of average US temperatures was calculated independently using only urban sites and only rural sites. The result was the same to 0.01C. Showing that their correction algorithms are very good.

Only if you assume that your previous assumptions are accurate. What would be your result if you were to assume that your previous assumptions were inaccurate? Then your "correction algorithm" becomes less accurate. You have absolutely no idea how accurate your "correction algorithm" is, completely ignoring the fact that absolutely no "correction algorithms" are allowed in science, engineering or IT industries.

It is required that the raw data, unaltered, unfudged, unmutilated, unfabricated and unmodified be published.

I love to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to find spurious excuses to avoid simply posting your raw data ... and to squirm out from under providing a clear, unambiguous definition of Climate. You clearly don't have any valid raw data otherwise you wouldn't go to such great lengths to bury your mix of fabricated and random data beneath layers of fraudulent processes.

DRKTS wrote: Not clear that most people prefer warm weather.

Right. I notice the rush to abandon Rio and flock down towards Antarctica.



Hey, look at Sweden. I bet Kiruna real estate is booming.



What about Russia? Do you think the Русские are buying vacation homes in northern Russia?


.


delusional



@DRKTS, anyone looking at the map of Russia recognizes the path the jet stream takes. It brings the warm air from the Gulf Stream inland.
With Sweden, it's population lives away from the mountains and in the warmer southern regions.
How do people miss the basics? Most of the guys in here really don't care. If they found something like that meaningful, then they're afraid that they might be expected to learn something.
FYI, I used to live in Norway and know why people in Scandinavia live where they do. It's like ITN will tell you, he has no understanding of the Gulf Stream, Scandinavia or Europe because he has never been there.
And like everyone else in this forum he has not been to Korea, the Philippines, Russia, the African continent or Australia. All this means is that because they've only been on one continent that that's all they can understand.
For fun I might go to Antarctica one day. Then I will have been on every continent in the world. I'd have to go through South America to get there.
Still, when people look at maps, these guys are basically stupid, I mean often enough I call gfm "gay mother ****er" and yet he might be a Christian.
It's like with the map of South America. Rio might be the most favourable place for people to live. It might be in the "Goldilocks" zone like the Earth is. During the rainy season the Amazon River swells. Basically 10 miles away from it in the dry season could be too close in the wet season.
People just can't live there. It'd be like Bangladesh and India with their monsoon season. And for me, I kind of expect people, that includes these idiots to know what a map is showing when they look at one.
You can ask them, I am an a$$hole and routinely tell them that they're "stuffed". They should just go and find some dark corner to "bugger" off to.
Yep, I expect people to know the basics. The maps that one of these idiots posted, might be my "communist" "son" IBDM, know what you're showing. Commies steal for a reason.
In reality, this could be a good thread but this forum is a cesspool.
11-08-2020 01:32
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
IBdaMann wrote:
DRKTS wrote:delusional

You are calling the population maps that I lifted off the internet "delusional."

This episode of Sesame Street is brought to you by the words "snowflake" and "loser" ... and the unfudged, unfabricated and unmodified number "3."




Son, you are so stupid I'm going to have another drink. OK, I had that one and a couple others. Why are you being so stupid for?
I'd hope that the maps you showed meant something to you. It's really disappointing to know that you literally missed everything. You're smart. Why waste your time with stupid games for?
I'll give you a clue. People like Daytona Beach, Fl. 41º north latitude. Rio is 20º south latitude.
What does the coriolis effect and the trade winds have to say about it? This is a basic question. It's easy peasey even. You should know this. Son, I really can't make this an easier for you. You should know this.
From my perspective son, this is what makes both science and the life on our planet so cool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzgQoGvSKA4
11-08-2020 01:34
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7465)
James___ wrote: FYI, I used to live in Norway and know why people in Scandinavia live where they do. It's like ITN will tell you, he has no understanding of the Gulf Stream, Scandinavia or Europe because he has never been there.

Hey, you have been extremely effective at making us aware of how the key to survival is to OBEY the Norwegian Jet Stream. When it tells you to move, you move. When it tells you where to live, you pack your bags.

My bad for not explicitly stating this but I thought it was obvious.

But seriously, it has always puzzled me whether the Norwegian Jet Stream travels through the ozone hole ... and what would happen if we were to close that hole. Do you have any thoughts?

.
Attached image:


Edited on 11-08-2020 01:35
11-08-2020 01:55
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote: FYI, I used to live in Norway and know why people in Scandinavia live where they do. It's like ITN will tell you, he has no understanding of the Gulf Stream, Scandinavia or Europe because he has never been there.

Hey, you have been extremely effective at making us aware of how the key to survival is to OBEY the Norwegian Jet Stream. When it tells you to move, you move. When it tells you where to live, you pack your bags.

My bad for not explicitly stating this but I thought it was obvious.

But seriously, it has always puzzled me whether the Norwegian Jet Stream travels through the ozone hole ... and what would happen if we were to close that hole. Do you have any thoughts?

.



You really missed it. When a boat is "sailing", it's even keel is not the equator.
When the Earth is "sailing", climate above and below the equator will be different.
Deserts are to the north of the equator and none to the south of it. The Earth is "sailing". I am very disappointed in you son when you miss such a simple metaphor.
It seems that the Earth's sails might be 10º leeward. Can you haul in the mizzen or shall I ask the coxswain?
11-08-2020 02:17
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7465)
James___ wrote: Son, you are so stupid I'm going to have another drink. OK, I had that one and a couple others.

If that's all the excuse you need to have a drink, I'm happy to help. In what way can I be stupid for you?



Is "Harahorn" the Norwegian word for "Jackalope"?



James___ wrote:Why are you being so stupid for?

If you use the word "Why" then you can't use the word "for" (nevermind that you should never end in a preposition), i.e.

"Why are you being so stupid?"

If you absolutely MUST use the word "for" then you need to use the word "What," i.e.

"What are you being so stupid for?"

We can cut you a little slack because you're of Norwegian descent but try to jot this down in your notes for future reference.

James___ wrote: It's really disappointing to know that you literally missed everything.

Well I was juggling that while trying to calculate the 935th digit of pi (which is "5" as it turns out).

James___ wrote: What does the coriolis effect and the trade winds have to say about it?

This is what they have to say!




.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-08-2020 02:43
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
Son, jackalopes are from the American southwest. Ever live in or around Phoenix?
As for what they say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3Rz-niZMo, I can go Romanian and "Southern" at the same time.
Culture and science are 2 different things. Southwest VS southeast.
11-08-2020 02:48
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7465)
James___ wrote:
Son, jackalopes are from the American southwest. Ever live in or around Phoenix?
As for what they say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3Rz-niZMo, I can go Romanian and "Southern" at the same time.
Culture and science are 2 different things. Southwest VS southeast.

James__, is that a "Yes," i.e. "Harahan" is the Norwegian word for "Jackalope"?

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-08-2020 10:07
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3375)
duncan61 wrote:[we cannot]take a snapshot and say the global average is XYZ of the entire planet

So we keep coming back to this fundamental issue:
What does it mean to "know" the temperature of a subject?
Can the temperature of any subject every be "known"?

Temperature is only ever determined as a range with a level of confidence. So we could determine that we are 95% confident that the mean temperature for a subject is between two temperatures.

Let me ask you this: Do you think we can be close to 100% confident that the mean ground level temperature of Earth is less than 5700K (temp of sun) and 1K?

Do you think it's possible to determine the temperature of a human body?

Of anything?

Currently Nasa claims that there is a 95% confidence level that the true mean temperature "on" Earth (ground level) is ±0.05°C (link)

IBdaMann wrote:...We do not know ...[to any usable margin of error].
B- We know it's not warming [preceptibly]
Perceptibaly? What exactly do you mean by that? Of course you've already made it clear that "perceptible" cannot be usable so pretty unclear.

gfm7175 wrote:
Egregious violation of tmiddles ordinance.
So my not debating your cogent point is me leaving you alone? Just keep throwing in the towel GFM you never really put up a fight anyway.

DRKTS wrote:
Not clear that most people prefer warm weather. The difference is between unusually hotter and warm weather. Most people live in the temperate zone (above 23 degrees in latitude), not in the tropics.
If it wasn't for Air Conditioning the population of warm areas would plummet (certainly Florida's would). Also the repeatedly stated and dead wrong pretense that global warming is of concern due to peoples comfort at a barbecue is so tired. You're too kind to indulge it DRKTS.

"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper
ITN/IBD Fraud exposed:  The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN
31-08-2020 13:51
duncan61
★★★☆☆
(575)
You have been gone for a while and this forum went quiet for a while.I have posted somewhere that the weather station at Amberley airforce base was set up in 1942 and has shown a 1 degree cooling in that time.I have seen the little box at the end of the runway as I used to visit my brother who was in 12 Squadron Chinooks at Amberley and I would jump on the Hercules at Townsville and fly down for a few days when we had rec leave.I was with 18 field sqn Engineers.The data has been homogenized and now shows a 1.76 degree warming.How does that work
31-08-2020 13:58
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3375)
duncan61 wrote:...now shows a 1.76 degree warming.How does that work
No clue but seems like provable fraud someone must have to explain if it's as you say.
31-08-2020 17:24
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★☆
(1214)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...We do not know ...[to any usable margin of error].
B- We know it's not warming [preceptibly]
Perceptibaly? What exactly do you mean by that? Of course you've already made it clear that "perceptible" cannot be usable so pretty unclear.

Able to be seen or noticed.
31-08-2020 19:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13295)
tmiddles wrote:
duncan61 wrote:...now shows a 1.76 degree warming.How does that work
No clue but seems like provable fraud someone must have to explain if it's as you say.


Attempted force of negative proof fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
01-09-2020 00:28
duncan61
★★★☆☆
(575)
People have challenged the Australian BOM directly and it gets dealt with bureaucratically
02-09-2020 03:15
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3375)
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...it's not warming [preceptibly]
Able to be seen or noticed.
So GFM do you consider it to be "useable" information that it's not "perceptibly" warming?

Seems to me it's not relevant at all. If the hypothesis was that it would warm perceptibly then sure, but 1 degree change in the global mean temp over 50 years is certainly not something a human being can see and notice with their physical body.

duncan61 wrote:
People have challenged the Australian BOM directly and it gets dealt with bureaucratically
Governments get nailed for misdeeds often. They aren't gods.
02-09-2020 17:30
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★☆
(1214)
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...it's not warming [preceptibly]
Able to be seen or noticed.
So GFM do you consider it to be "useable" information that it's not "perceptibly" warming?

Seems to me it's not relevant at all. If the hypothesis was that it would warm perceptibly then sure, but 1 degree change in the global mean temp over 50 years is certainly not something a human being can see and notice with their physical body.

Hold up...

1 degree {what?} ... Fahrenheit? Celsius? Kelvin?

What valid "global mean temperature" data are you referring to? None exists... It is not possible to measure global temperature to any usable accuracy. You are making shit up.

What "50 years" are you referring to? 1970-2020?? Why a 50 year time period? Why THOSE 50 years in particular?

You have other questions that remain unanswered as well...
Edited on 02-09-2020 17:30
02-09-2020 23:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13295)
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...it's not warming [preceptibly]
Able to be seen or noticed.
So GFM do you consider it to be "useable" information that it's not "perceptibly" warming?

Seems to me it's not relevant at all. If the hypothesis was that it would warm perceptibly then sure, but 1 degree change in the global mean temp over 50 years is certainly not something a human being can see and notice with their physical body.

Semantics fallacies. No argument presented. Mantras 10j.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-09-2020 01:41
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3375)
gfm7175 wrote: It is not possible to measure global temperature to any usable accuracy.
Is it possible to measure the temperature of anything and have it be usable? Anything at all. Give a good example to contrast with what you claim isn't working.

gfm7175 wrote:
I have no clue what the temperature of my house is.


If your argument is in fact that temperature data is never usable then admit that.

"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper
ITN/IBD Fraud exposed:  The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN
03-09-2020 01:52
duncan61
★★★☆☆
(575)
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...it's not warming [preceptibly]
Able to be seen or noticed.
So GFM do you consider it to be "useable" information that it's not "perceptibly" warming?

Seems to me it's not relevant at all. If the hypothesis was that it would warm perceptibly then sure, but 1 degree change in the global mean temp over 50 years is certainly not something a human being can see and notice with their physical body.

duncan61 wrote:
People have challenged the Australian BOM directly and it gets dealt with bureaucratically
Governments get nailed for misdeeds often. They aren't gods.


And the information that gets sent out is not true


duncan61
03-09-2020 02:14
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3375)
duncan61 wrote:And the information that gets sent out is not true
So what's preventing the truth from getting out?

So you doubt there are extremely wealthy and powerful parties that would like to see CC discredited?

The classic conspiracy theory requires a adversary (in this case governments) so powerful that they are able to control everything.

I don't know about you but I don't see governments being able to do too much with absolute competence.
03-09-2020 05:15
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13295)
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 29...30a...IAW tmiddles ordinance #1...


No argument presented. Denial of mathematics. You cannot speak for others. You can only speak for yourself.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-09-2020 05:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13295)
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 29...35a...16c...


No argument presented. Denial of history.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-09-2020 20:59
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 29...35a...16c...


No argument presented. Denial of history.



You're as HOT as July when you "post" like that
03-09-2020 22:36
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote: Son, you are so stupid I'm going to have another drink. OK, I had that one and a couple others.

If that's all the excuse you need to have a drink, I'm happy to help. In what way can I be stupid for you?



Is "Harahorn" the Norwegian word for "Jackalope"?



James___ wrote:Why are you being so stupid for?

If you use the word "Why" then you can't use the word "for" (nevermind that you should never end in a preposition), i.e.

"Why are you being so stupid?"

If you absolutely MUST use the word "for" then you need to use the word "What," i.e.

"What are you being so stupid for?"

We can cut you a little slack because you're of Norwegian descent but try to jot this down in your notes for future reference.

James___ wrote: It's really disappointing to know that you literally missed everything.

Well I was juggling that while trying to calculate the 935th digit of pi (which is "5" as it turns out).

James___ wrote: What does the coriolis effect and the trade winds have to say about it?

This is what they have to say!




.



I'm trying to be more like Harvey55. Thanks for the help with my Engleske, Son. You're saying I should say "why are you being so stupid per se" and not "for"? Okay, Thanks


per se
/ˌpər ˈsā/
adverb
adverb: per se; adverb: perse

by or in itself or themselves; intrinsically.

So the adverb "per se" would describe the verb "being" as it relates to "stupid" which is an adjective which describes a noun which in this instance would be "you". Right?

I am hoping to attend this cultural event. I just wonder if drinking chocolate milk would be acceptable?

https://www.facebook.com/events/motorsport-arena-oschersleben/rock-metal-dayz-2021/330760481217077/

p.s., am listening to your link. Here's more Norwegian one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRg_8NNPTD8 Kind of where I wish my mother would've had our father make sure we knew his language.

And son, one of the funniest things I remember from when I was 4 years old was my brother Eddie. He said he woke up during the night and it was dark outside. We told him he must have been dreaming.

As you can see, from Early April until the end of August, night doesn't happen.

https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/norway/alesund
And yet all of you guys will say that night does happen. It's what you know.
Attached image:


Edited on 03-09-2020 22:54
03-09-2020 23:18
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
webkamera around Aalesund. They have "night" now.
Night is defined by the amount of luminosity from the Sun.

https://www.smp.no/webkamera/

p.s., I kind of think you guys missed out on something by only living in 1 country, with 1 culture and 1 language. It's kind of like I'm picking on you guys.

Edited on 03-09-2020 23:19
04-09-2020 01:06
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
With Rock Metal Dayz, it is a fundraiser. MaDE helps both at risk kids and kids with cancer. I think I could help to raise money for such groups across Europe. It would be ironic. An at risk kid in the US who had cancer understands this.
And I'll be able to have some fun with this as well. https://www.made4kids.org/

p.s., in the chrome web browser, it translates. With me, I am a fan of The Gäs. They will be performing at Rock Metal Dayz 2021.
Edited on 04-09-2020 01:47
04-09-2020 02:19
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
It's not personal ya'all. I still find it hilarious my "older" brother trying to say it was "dark" in the middle of the "night". That is sooo funny. It wasn't winter. How could it be dark at night?
In being serious, everyone laughed at him.
04-09-2020 03:56
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2403)
James___ wrote:
webkamera around Aalesund. They have "night" now.
Night is defined by the amount of luminosity from the Sun.

https://www.smp.no/webkamera/

p.s., I kind of think you guys missed out on something by only living in 1 country, with 1 culture and 1 language. It's kind of like I'm picking on you guys.


Have lived in America for very long, or just stepped off the fishing boat? Our country is made up of cultures and languages, from all over the world. Much easier here, because many share a common language, English. When you go to other countries, you are better off learning their language, or stuck trying to find someone who understand some English, not so bad accent, and isn't running a scam.
04-09-2020 04:40
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
HarveyH55 wrote:
James___ wrote:
webkamera around Aalesund. They have "night" now.
Night is defined by the amount of luminosity from the Sun.

https://www.smp.no/webkamera/

p.s., I kind of think you guys missed out on something by only living in 1 country, with 1 culture and 1 language. It's kind of like I'm picking on you guys.


Have lived in America for very long, or just stepped off the fishing boat? Our country is made up of cultures and languages, from all over the world. Much easier here, because many share a common language, English. When you go to other countries, you are better off learning their language, or stuck trying to find someone who understand some English, not so bad accent, and isn't running a scam.



You can't speak from experience. I'm from Ohio and am a disabled Veteran while you're from Oregon. I have 2 service connected disabilities.
You don't get it Harvey. Many people speak English as a 2nd language. Musicians I follow of YouTube for the most part speak and sing English as a 2nd language.
She's Romanian; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3Rz-niZMo
Her friend; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B977BkQSuI0
And why visiting Germany could be a good thing; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyF5A7BFnqw (Rick Benbow, organ is an American)

And not in English; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79m-9ifeCAY
Edited on 04-09-2020 04:53
04-09-2020 05:07
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
Get a clue Harvey. IBDM isn't my son but I expect something out of him. While he might disagree with me, I expect more from him. He has his life to live and I don't want him to be stupid. His being smart doesn't require him to agree with me. It has to do with what he does. Just not an easy thing to teach someone but I know he gets it. Kind of why I like him.
04-09-2020 05:45
James___
★★★★★
(3173)
For those of you who don't get it, IBDM is smart. And as far as this debate goes, he can do better. And when I say he can do better, that's in his own life. He actually understands surface temperature vs. atmospheric temperature. He played with it while everyone else missed it.

IBDM, will send a PM.
Edited on 04-09-2020 05:54
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate July 2020 - Feeling the Heat?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
July 2020: the second warmest July on Record.2615-08-2020 23:14
US climate for July 20203611-08-2020 00:05
The Heat Goes On1405-06-2020 19:24
There is no scientific theory or evidence that suggest CO2 traps heat better than O2 or N252624-01-2020 06:17
Definition of heat and heat pump4021-01-2020 18:21
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact