Remember me
▼ Content

July 4, 2023 - Hottest day ever recorded



Page 6 of 7<<<4567>
25-12-2023 07:24
James_
★★★★★
(2273)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:LOL as 99.99999% of all Earth years went un-recorded

How do you know that 0.00001% of each year (3.15 seconds) was recorded?

What was recorded for the 3.15 seconds of the first Earth year? How was it recorded? ... audio cassette?


Actually 100% of every year has been recorded since 1850/1880 or so. Before that there are no records of any type.

Now take your pills and go back to sleep


Standardize temperature recordings started in 1898. Average temperature doesn't mean much, if you keep adding hundreds of new locations each year. Mainly in warm places, with commercial airports... Then, of course in 1970,, the official temperatures were derived from satellite data. Not sure when land based stations were mostly abandoned. The temperatures were only intended/significant to local conditions.



Tsk, tsk, tsk. When the adjacent waters to Greenland below 70º N. latitude
suddenly warmed and white whales migrated to the Hudson Bay. This was in the 1920's. You'll notice in the graph that global warming was happening in the 1920's when white whales and you know this, they like cold arctic waters had to migrate to the Hudson Bay. Don't you like White Whales?

p.s., It is odd that it basically warmed from around 1920 to 1980 and then it accelerated. If you delete WW II then that is what it basically shows. And yes, when marine life changes the location where it is usually found, that does describe climate change.
This suggests that WW II and ozone depletion are man made warming.
Attached image:


Edited on 25-12-2023 07:30
25-12-2023 14:11
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(5740)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:LOL as 99.99999% of all Earth years went un-recorded

How do you know that 0.00001% of each year (3.15 seconds) was recorded?

What was recorded for the 3.15 seconds of the first Earth year? How was it recorded? ... audio cassette?


Actually 100% of every year has been recorded since 1850/1880 or so. Before that there are no records of any type.

Now take your pills and go back to sleep


Standardize temperature recordings started in 1898. Average temperature doesn't mean much, if you keep adding hundreds of new locations each year. Mainly in warm places, with commercial airports... Then, of course in 1970,, the official temperatures were derived from satellite data. Not sure when land based stations were mostly abandoned. The temperatures were only intended/significant to local conditions.


One more time in English please


IBdaMann claims that Gold is a molecule, and that the last ice age never happened because I was not there to see it. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that IBdaMann is clearly not using enough LSD.

According to CDC/Government info, people who were vaccinated are now DYING at a higher rate than non-vaccinated people, which exposes the covid vaccines as the poison that they are, this is now fully confirmed by the terrorist CDC

This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

"Being unwanted, unloved, uncared for, forgotten by everybody, I think that is a much greater hunger, a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat." MOTHER THERESA OF CALCUTTA

So why is helping to hide the murder of an American president patriotic?


It's time to dig up Joseph Mccarthey and show him TikTok, then duck.


Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
RE: May 4, 2024 - COLDEST May 4 ever, where I live.06-05-2024 02:36
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
Im a BM wrote:
It is not official yet.

But all indications are that when the data is all compiled, it will show:

July 4, 2023 was the hottest day ever recorded.




May 4, 2024, Northern California set record lows for daily high temperatures.

The atmospheric river (aka "pineapple express") from the Pacific intersected with some very cold air from Alaska, bringing down cold rain and late season snow.

Climate change isn't just about global warming.

It is also about extreme weather.

Extreme means deviating far from the norm.
06-05-2024 05:11
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14718)
Im a BM wrote: May 4, 2024, Northern California set record lows for daily high temperatures.

Every day some place is setting some sort of weather record. Every day, forever.

Im a BM wrote: Climate change isn't just about global warming.
It is also about extreme weather.

Normal occurrences are not extreme weather.

Im a BM wrote: Extreme means deviating far from the norm.

You haven't defined "far"; color me surprised.

This amounts to nothing more than a "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
06-05-2024 07:11
James_
★★★★★
(2273)
IBdaMann wrote:
Im a BM wrote: May 4, 2024, Northern California set record lows for daily high temperatures.

Every day some place is setting some sort of weather record. Every day, forever.

Im a BM wrote: Climate change isn't just about global warming.
It is also about extreme weather.

Normal occurrences are not extreme weather.

Im a BM wrote: Extreme means deviating far from the norm.

You haven't defined "far"; color me surprised.

This amounts to nothing more than a "No True Scotsman" fallacy.



Every day some place is setting some sort of weather record. Every day, forever.



This is so true. Why just today every city in the world set the new record for the most days with weather. It was 1 more than the previous record set the day before. I swear its true.
06-05-2024 11:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
James_ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Im a BM wrote: May 4, 2024, Northern California set record lows for daily high temperatures.

Every day some place is setting some sort of weather record. Every day, forever.

Im a BM wrote: Climate change isn't just about global warming.
It is also about extreme weather.

Normal occurrences are not extreme weather.

Im a BM wrote: Extreme means deviating far from the norm.

You haven't defined "far"; color me surprised.

This amounts to nothing more than a "No True Scotsman" fallacy.



Every day some place is setting some sort of weather record. Every day, forever.



This is so true. Why just today every city in the world set the new record for the most days with weather. It was 1 more than the previous record set the day before. I swear its true.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. You are ignoring mathematics again.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: April, 2024 - Hottest April ever recorded.08-05-2024 08:05
sealover
★★★★☆
(1707)
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'



Oh, and the thread title is wrong. July 4, 2023 was NOT the hottest day ever recorded. That record didn't last more than a day or two. Nor did the next record last more than a day or two..
08-05-2024 08:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. You are ignoring mathematics again.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
05-06-2024 23:32
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
How unexpected!

May, 2024 continued the streak to make 12 consecutive months that were all the hottest ever recorded.

Go back to sleep. It's all just a Marxist hoax. ALL the world's scientists are either corrupt or inexcusably incompetent.

The only ACCURATE science is a closely guarded secret, known only to trolls.

But they will give you a few hints. It is impossible for climate to change because thermodynamics.... something something... You'll have to ask a troll, because MY science training was inadequate to make sense of it.

It must be part of a natural cycle or something. Every 20,000 years, the rivers in northern Alaska turn orange. Perfectly normal. Go back to sleep.


sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'



Oh, and the thread title is wrong. July 4, 2023 was NOT the hottest day ever recorded. That record didn't last more than a day or two. Nor did the next record last more than a day or two..
06-06-2024 00:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
Im a BM wrote:
How unexpected!

May, 2024 continued the streak to make 12 consecutive months that were all the hottest ever recorded.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
Go back to sleep. It's all just a Marxist hoax. ALL the world's scientists are either corrupt or inexcusably incompetent.

Random numbers is not science. You don't get to speak for everyone. Omniscience fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
The only ACCURATE science is a closely guarded secret, known only to trolls.

The laws of thermodynamics are not secret.
Im a BM wrote:
But they will give you a few hints. It is impossible for climate to change because thermodynamics.... something something... You'll have to ask a troll, because MY science training was inadequate to make sense of it.

Science isn't 'training'. You cannot make the laws of thermodynamics just disappear, dude.
Climate cannot change. You have already shown you have difficulty reading and understanding English as well.
Im a BM wrote:
It must be part of a natural cycle or something. Every 20,000 years, the rivers in northern Alaska turn orange.

Rivers are not temperature. No don't know what happened 20,000 years ago. Omniscience 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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-06-2024 00:28
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(3011)
sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'

Have you any clue how the temperature of the earth is measured? I fail to find any method that even gets close to wildly inaccurate. Maybe you can help? Thanks in advance.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
06-06-2024 02:06
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'

Have you any clue how the temperature of the earth is measured? I fail to find any method that even gets close to wildly inaccurate. Maybe you can help? Thanks in advance.



Yes, I have MANY clues how the temperature of the earth is measured.

It doesn't sound like you are accusing anyone of LYING about the data.

If the measurements are "wildly inaccurate", they should not trend in just one direction - upward.
06-06-2024 02:09
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(3011)
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'

Have you any clue how the temperature of the earth is measured? I fail to find any method that even gets close to wildly inaccurate. Maybe you can help? Thanks in advance.



Yes, I have MANY clues how the temperature of the earth is measured.

It doesn't sound like you are accusing anyone of LYING about the data.

If the measurements are "wildly inaccurate", they should not trend in just one direction - upward.


I'm not accusing you of lying about the numbers (not data). I am accusing you of faithfully believing what you were told to.... That is, unless you can explain how the temperature of the earth is accurately measured. Can you?


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
06-06-2024 02:24
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'

Have you any clue how the temperature of the earth is measured? I fail to find any method that even gets close to wildly inaccurate. Maybe you can help? Thanks in advance.



Yes, I have MANY clues how the temperature of the earth is measured.

It doesn't sound like you are accusing anyone of LYING about the data.

If the measurements are "wildly inaccurate", they should not trend in just one direction - upward.


I'm not accusing you of lying about the numbers (not data). I am accusing you of faithfully believing what you were told to.... That is, unless you can explain how the temperature of the earth is accurately measured. Can you?


If I faithfully believed what I was told to, I would have never published any original discoveries. They ALL defied the prevailing wisdom, and therefore had a much higher bar for the kind of proof required to support them. And they all passed the test.

Some "skeptics" argue that the only accurate temperature data is more recent than 1978, when satellites began measuring earth temperatures. They want to throw out all the thermometer data from prior years. And if climate history didn't BEGIN until 1978, the more recent changes are less striking.

But let's just pretend that ALL the equipment is wildly inaccurate.

Let's say that it is plus or minus 5% of true temperature.

Measurements are just as likely to be 5% too low as 5% too high.

There is no way that inaccurate measurement can account for the consistent upward trend with time.

Maybe you know something about the technology that would explain it having an increasingly high bias over time, resulting in higher and higher measurements despite no actual change in average temperature.
06-06-2024 02:30
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(3011)
Old Mercury thermometers were extremely accurate, maybe more so than today's digitals depending on the quality.

The problem I see is that satellites cannot measure temperature. This begs the question ; whose ass are the numbers plucked from and why should I believe there is any accuracy to the numbers put forth?
06-06-2024 03:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14718)
GasGuzzler wrote: Old Mercury thermometers were extremely accurate, maybe more so than today's digitals depending on the quality.

Be careful here. Measuring temperature, even with magically perfect instrumentation, has unknown error if you don't know the pressure.

I know, I know, nobody ever includes pressure when discussing temperature, but remember that you can boil water until it freezes, and witness water at its "tri-point" (when it is a solid, liquid and gas at the same time) by only adjusting pressure.

Ergo, without pressure co-measurements, you can't really draw usable conclusions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5mkf066p-U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SOCni8JfiU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4BGV7-1lhs

GasGuzzler wrote: The problem I see is that satellites cannot measure temperature.

Be careful here. Satellites can measure temperature, but only relative temperature, not absolute temperature. If you state only that satellites cannot measure temperature, you lose before you get out of the starting gate.

By measuring relative temperature, satellites can capture imagery of an aircraft's thermal signature such that one can know the make and model of the jet engine. The thermal signature, i.e. the relative temperatures captured, will be the same regardless of altitude and differing absolute temperatures.

GasGuzzler wrote: This begs the question ; whose ass are the numbers plucked from and why should I believe there is any accuracy to the numbers put forth?

Not Frank's ass; he's all out of fabricated numbers.
Edited on 06-06-2024 03:37
06-06-2024 05:48
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(3011)
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: Old Mercury thermometers were extremely accurate, maybe more so than today's digitals depending on the quality.

Be careful here. Measuring temperature, even with magically perfect instrumentation, has unknown error if you don't know the pressure.

I know, I know, nobody ever includes pressure when discussing temperature, but remember that you can boil water until it freezes, and witness water at its "tri-point" (when it is a solid, liquid and gas at the same time) by only adjusting pressure.

Ergo, without pressure co-measurements, you can't really draw usable conclusions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5mkf066p-U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SOCni8JfiU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4BGV7-1lhs


Well I was assuming apples to apples....but that typically makes an ass out of me. You are correct and thanks for pointing this out.




IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: The problem I see is that satellites cannot measure temperature.

Be careful here. Satellites can measure temperature, but only relative temperature, not absolute temperature. If you state only that satellites cannot measure temperature, you lose before you get out of the starting gate.

By measuring relative temperature, satellites can capture imagery of an aircraft's thermal signature such that one can know the make and model of the jet engine. The thermal signature, i.e. the relative temperatures captured, will be the same regardless of altitude and differing absolute temperatures.


Hang on there grasshopper. There's just no way in hell I'm dumbing this down for you by clarifying my terms. If you just Google temperature then any troll can know exactly what I intended. When I chant, my audience needs no clarification. Did I tell you I am a prestigious PHD? (Prolific Hydrocarbon Driver)
Now you're going to go off about emissivity and the SB law blah blah blah. You're always trying to interject with science blah blah blah.
Go somewhere else you ugly troll. THIS thread is about global warming.

IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote: This begs the question ; whose ass are the numbers plucked from and why should I believe there is any accuracy to the numbers put forth?

Not Frank's ass; he's all out of fabricated numbers.

Ralph started with 50 and then printed 50 so he prolly has 50. I'll get some from him.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
06-06-2024 08:15
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14718)
GasGuzzler wrote:Hang on there grasshopper. There's just no way in hell I'm dumbing this down for you by clarifying my terms. If you just Google temperature then any troll can know exactly what I intended. When I chant, my audience needs no clarification. Did I tell you I am a prestigious PHD (Prolific Hydrocarbon Driver)? Now you're going to go off about emissivity and the SB law blah blah blah. You're always trying to interject with science blah blah blah. Go somewhere else you ugly troll. THIS thread is about global warming.

[hangs head low] I don't know what got into me.

GasGuzzler wrote: Ralph started with 50 and then printed 50 so he prolly has 50. I'll get some from him.

This gets into the keepit equality theorem, i.e. total dollars = total dollars + printed dollars. This allows for natural variation to always remain artifically constant outside the Van Allen belt's magnetic cancellation of gravity, which I will be demonstrating with my next Bessler reel ... because I plan to catch fish out of nothing forever. Then I'll be able to have a life.
06-06-2024 09:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Have you any clue how the temperature of the earth is measured? I fail to find any method that even gets close to wildly inaccurate. Maybe you can help? Thanks in advance.

Yes, I have MANY clues how the temperature of the earth is measured.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
It doesn't sound like you are accusing anyone of LYING about the data.

There is no data.
Im a BM wrote:
If the measurements are "wildly inaccurate", they should not trend in just one direction - upward.

Base rate fallacy. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-06-2024 09:17
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
Im a BM wrote:
If I faithfully believed what I was told to, I would have never published any original discoveries.

You have no discoveries.
Im a BM wrote:
They ALL defied the prevailing wisdom, and therefore had a much higher bar for the kind of proof required to support them. And they all passed the test.

Void argument fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
Some "skeptics" argue that the only accurate temperature data is more recent than 1978,

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
when satellites began measuring earth temperatures.

Satellites are incapable of measuring the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
They want to throw out all the thermometer data from prior years.

There is no thermometer measuring the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
And if climate history

Climate has no history.
Im a BM wrote:
didn't BEGIN until 1978, the more recent changes are less striking.

Base rate fallacy. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
But let's just pretend that ALL the equipment is wildly inaccurate.

What equipment?
Im a BM wrote:
Let's say that it is plus or minus 5% of true temperature.

What equipment?
Im a BM wrote:
Measurements are just as likely to be 5% too low as 5% too high.

What equipment?
Im a BM wrote:
There is no way that inaccurate measurement can account for the consistent upward trend with time.

Base rate fallacy. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
Maybe you know something about the technology that would explain it having an increasingly high bias over time, resulting in higher and higher measurements despite no actual change in average temperature.

Denial of the 0th law of thermodynamics. Base rate fallacy. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-06-2024 09:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Old Mercury thermometers were extremely accurate, maybe more so than today's digitals depending on the quality.

The problem I see is that satellites cannot measure temperature. This begs the question ; whose ass are the numbers plucked from and why should I believe there is any accuracy to the numbers put forth?

It's not about equipment tolerance. It's about statistical math.

Robert is simply ignoring mathematics.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-06-2024 21:04
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14718)
Into the Night wrote:Robert is simply ignoring mathematics.

I'm not convinced he ever learned it in the first place. He can't ignore that which he isn't aware even exists.

Can you recall even a single one of Robert's posts in which he either specifies or scrutinizes the margin of error for his claims, or the tolerances of the instrumentation behind the claims? If he were actually a scientist, he would have included mention of the tolerance of his gamma-spec in order to impart confidence in his findings.

I'm glad that you noticed his presumption of supporting data and of an abundance of sufficient perfect instrumentation.

I understand clearly why Robert doesn't dare define any terms that might pin him down on any physics violation he holds dear, which would put him in a nasty pickle to explain why he considers himself a thienth geniuth.
07-06-2024 20:02
sealover
★★★★☆
(1707)
Let's pretend that the world's top scientists are huddled to discuss the huge problems with the temperature data set.

Let's pretend that two groups of scientists have come up with two completely different sets of numbers.

One set of numbers says that temperatures in the last 40 years are not significantly higher than previous centuries.

The other set of numbers says that temperature keeps creeping up higher.

What OTHER data could settle the dispute?

How about altitude range of forest pests?

If there has been no increase in temperature, then there has been a sudden leap in evolution. Very rapid adaptation has enabled bark boring beetles, etc., to thrive at higher altitude than before.

How about the latitude range of boreal forest trees?

If there has been no increase in temperature, there has been a sudden leap in evolution. Very rapid adaptation has enabled boreal forest trees to thrive at latitudes further north than before.

How about the elevation range of plant communities of all types?

If there has been no increase in temperature, there has been a sudden leap in evolution. Very rapid adaptation has enabled multiple kinds of plant communities to thrive at higher elevation than before.

But there IS no group of scientists with alternative temperature data showing no significant increase in the last 40 years.

Just internet trolls who pretend to understand science.

----------------------------------------

How unexpected!

May, 2024 continued the streak to make 12 consecutive months that were all the hottest ever recorded.

Go back to sleep. It's all just a Marxist hoax. ALL the world's scientists are either corrupt or inexcusably incompetent.

The only ACCURATE science is a closely guarded secret, known only to trolls.

But they will give you a few hints. It is impossible for climate to change because thermodynamics.... something something... You'll have to ask a troll, because MY science training was inadequate to make sense of it.

It must be part of a natural cycle or something. Every 20,000 years, the rivers in northern Alaska turn orange. Perfectly normal. Go back to sleep.


[quote]sealover wrote:
April, 2024 was the hottest April ever recorded.

Before that, March, 2024 was the hottest March ever recorded.

Before that, February, 2024 was the hottest February ever recorded.

Before that, January, 2024 was the hottest January ever recorded.

Before that, December, 2023 was the hottest December ever recorded.

Before that, November, 2023 was the hottest November ever recorded.

Before that, October, 2023 was the hottest October ever recorded.

Before that, September, 2023 was the hottest September ever recorded.

Before that, August, 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

Before that, July, 2023 was the hottest July ever recorded.

And before that, June, 2023 was the hottest June ever recorded.


just sayin'



Oh, and the thread title is wrong. July 4, 2023 was NOT the hottest day ever recorded. That record didn't last more than a day or two. Nor did the next record last more than a day or two..
07-06-2024 20:20
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
im a bm,
That's a well presented case.
07-06-2024 20:41
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
keepit wrote:
im a bm,
That's a well presented case.



Why would any rational adult disagree with you?

They wouldn't.

But they wouldn't feel very welcomed at this website.

This is a pretty tough neighborhood for rational adults.

They generally steer clear of places like this.

At least the current version of this place.

But I'm hoping to help change that and make a more rational-adult-friendly environment.
07-06-2024 20:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14718)
sealover wrote: Let's pretend that the world's top scientists are huddled to discuss the huge problems with the temperature data set.

Let's pretend that two groups of scientists have come up with two completely different sets of numbers.

One set of numbers says that temperatures in the last 40 years are not significantly higher than previous centuries.

The other set of numbers says that temperature keeps creeping up higher.

First you have to show these two valid datasets along with their computed margins of error ... which you can't do since there is no "The Data."

Your argument doesn't even get out of the starting gate. At least you have keepit cheering for you. He'll cheer on anything as long as it's wrong.

keepit wrote: im a bm, That's a well presented case.

Too funny. You totally agree without ever seeing any of this supposed "The Data."

Every day, there are many highest temperature records for different size regions over different lengths of time, just as there are many lowest temperature records for different size regions over different lengths of time. All anyone needs to do, which is what Robert did, is to only present you with some highest temperature records while omitting all lowest temperature records, and you can't orgasm fast enough.

You are a gullible moron.
07-06-2024 21:00
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
More name calling ibd? What about a semantic argument?
07-06-2024 21:03
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14718)
keepit wrote: More name calling ibd? What about a semantic argument?

I was just wondering when you were going to make one that isn't absurdly contradictory from the start.

Well, when? ... and no more your baloney.
07-06-2024 21:24
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
ibd,
Really. Can't you start to make some SUBSTANTIAL points rather than just petty name calling and semantic arguments, and lies and inaccuracies.
07-06-2024 21:51
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
keepit wrote:
ibd,
Really. Can't you start to make some SUBSTANTIAL points rather than just petty name calling and semantic arguments, and lies and inaccuracies.



Well, as IBdaMann put it, "Watch out for trolls who hide behind word games.."

One of the more transparent word games might be called "Obfuscation fallacy".

A simple question can't be answered in a direct way.

Instead, they will answer a question that nobody asked using a shift in wording...

Radium is not helium. Hydrogen is not a proton. Change to the acid.

There is no intellectual honesty in the obfuscation fallacy.

And the point is to ensure that there is no way to pin them down for any specific assertion, which would otherwise be easily debunked.

Add petty personal insults and false accusations to the mix liberally, and don't forget that anyone outside of their Church is actually a Marxist with evil intentions to harm humanity.
07-06-2024 23:16
Im a BM
★★★☆☆
(955)
Let's pretend that the world's top scientists are huddled to discuss the huge problems with the temperature data set.

Let's pretend that two groups of scientists have come up with two different sets of numbers.

One set of numbers says that temperatures in the last 40 years are not significantly higher than previous centuries.

The other set of numbers says that temperature keeps creeping up higher.

What OTHER data could settle the dispute?

How about altitude range of forest pests?

If there has been no increase in temperature, then there must have been a sudden leap in evolution. The higher altitude zones are just as cold as they used to be. Very rapid adaptation has enabled bark boring beetles, etc., to thrive in colder temperatures, at higher altitude than before.

How about the latitude range of boreal forest trees?

If there has been no increase in temperature, then there must have been a sudden leap in evolution. The higher latitude zones are just as cold as they used to be. Very rapid adaptation has enabled boreal forest trees to thrive in colder temperature, at latitudes further north than before.

How about the elevation range of plant communities of all types?

If there has been no increase in temperature, then there must have been a sudden leap in evolution. It is just as cold as it used to be at higher altitude. Very rapid adaptation has enabled multiple kinds of plant communities to thrive in colder temperature, at higher elevation than before.

But there IS no group of scientists with alternative temperature data showing no significant increase in the last 40 years.

Just internet trolls who pretend to understand science.

Could go on about agricultural pest species range shifting to where it has gotten warmer, snow lines, tree lines, biome boundaries.

Mother Nature provides a whole lot of temperature evidence that doesn't require a thermometer.

In this case, I would say that the Earth's evidence overrules human data sets if there is truly a dispute about whether or not global warming is occurring.

But there is no such dispute among real world scientists.
08-06-2024 02:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:Robert is simply ignoring mathematics.

I'm not convinced he ever learned it in the first place. He can't ignore that which he isn't aware even exists.

A valid point.
IBdaMann wrote:
Can you recall even a single one of Robert's posts in which he either specifies or scrutinizes the margin of error for his claims, or the tolerances of the instrumentation behind the claims?

Now that you mention it...no.
IBdaMann wrote:
If he were actually a scientist, he would have included mention of the tolerance of his gamma-spec in order to impart confidence in his findings.

He is no scientist. He ignores too many theories of science.
IBdaMann wrote:
I'm glad that you noticed his presumption of supporting data and of an abundance of sufficient perfect instrumentation.

That's rather normal for a believer in the Church of Global Warming.
IBdaMann wrote:
I understand clearly why Robert doesn't dare define any terms that might pin him down on any physics violation he holds dear, which would put him in a nasty pickle to explain why he considers himself a thienth geniuth.

Just like other Believers.

The difference with Robert is his incessant spamming and "baffle 'em with bullshit" routine that he uses.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 02:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
sealover wrote:
Let's pretend that the world's top scientists are huddled to discuss the huge problems with the temperature data set.

There is no such data set. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
sealover wrote:
Let's pretend that two groups of scientists have come up with two completely different sets of numbers.

One set of numbers says that temperatures in the last 40 years are not significantly higher than previous centuries.

The other set of numbers says that temperature keeps creeping up higher.

What OTHER data could settle the dispute?

There is no data set. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
sealover wrote:
How about altitude range of forest pests?

Vacuous argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
If there has been no increase in temperature, then there has been a sudden leap in evolution. Very rapid adaptation has enabled bark boring beetles, etc., to thrive at higher altitude than before.

Vacuous argument fallacy. Attempted proof by void.
sealover wrote:
How about the latitude range of boreal forest trees?

If there has been no increase in temperature, there has been a sudden leap in evolution. Very rapid adaptation has enabled boreal forest trees to thrive at latitudes further north than before.

Vacuous argument fallacy. Attempted proof by void.
sealover wrote:
How about the elevation range of plant communities of all types?

Void argument fallacy.
sealover wrote:
If there has been no increase in temperature, there has been a sudden leap in evolution. Very rapid adaptation has enabled multiple kinds of plant communities to thrive at higher elevation than before.

Void argument fallacy. Attempted proof by void.
sealover wrote:
But there IS no group of scientists with alternative temperature data showing no significant increase in the last 40 years.

There is no temperature data. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
sealover wrote:
Just internet trolls who pretend to understand science.

Mathematics is not science. Redefinition 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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 02:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
keepit wrote:
im a bm,
That's a well presented case.

He didn't make a case, keepit.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 02:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
Im a BM wrote:
keepit wrote:
im a bm,
That's a well presented case.



Why would any rational adult disagree with you?

They wouldn't.

But they wouldn't feel very welcomed at this website.

This is a pretty tough neighborhood for rational adults.

They generally steer clear of places like this.

At least the current version of this place.

But I'm hoping to help change that and make a more rational-adult-friendly environment.

Mantra 1a. Calling everyone a child isn't going to get you anywhere.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 02:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
keepit wrote:
More name calling ibd? What about a semantic argument?

What about it, keepit? Do you want to start another one?


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 02:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
keepit wrote:
ibd,
Really. Can't you start to make some SUBSTANTIAL points rather than just petty name calling and semantic arguments, and lies and inaccuracies.

Blaming your own problem on IBD or anybody else isn't going to work, keepit.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 03:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
Im a BM wrote:
...deleted spam...

Could go on about agricultural pest species range shifting to where it has gotten warmer, snow lines, tree lines, biome boundaries.

Sure. You go on and on about made up numbers. BUT YOU ARE MAKING THEM UP.
Im a BM wrote:
Mother Nature provides a whole lot of temperature evidence that doesn't require a thermometer.

Void argument fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
In this case, I would say that the Earth's evidence

Earth is not evidence of temperature.
Im a BM wrote:
overrules human data sets

There is not data set. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Im a BM wrote:
if there is truly a dispute about whether or not global warming is occurring.

No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are still ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Im a BM wrote:
But there is no such dispute among real world scientists.

You don't get to speak for everyone. Omniscience fallacy. Science does not use consensus. There is no voting bloc in science. Science is not data. Redefinition fallacies.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-06-2024 03:10
keepit
★★★★★
(3330)
itn,
Stop arguing against your own "filaments".
08-06-2024 03:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22228)
keepit wrote:
ibd,
Really. Can't you start to make some SUBSTANTIAL points rather than just petty name calling and semantic arguments, and lies and inaccuracies.

You can't blame your problem on anybody else, keepit.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Page 6 of 7<<<4567>





Join the debate July 4, 2023 - Hottest day ever recorded:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Why are earthquakes more likely to occur at night than during the day1709-11-2023 12:39
Book your bargain rate Israeli Tel Aviv or Jerusalem vacation now, free 4th of July style fireworks inclu118-10-2023 05:25
Present temperature spike July '233127-09-2023 00:27
Is Edward Snowden a hero? Should all of your personal phone calls be recorded?4115-07-2023 20:36
Happy fourth of July. I wonder how many liberals are eating carbon cooked burgers106-07-2023 23:52
▲ 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