Remember me
▼ Content

NEW HIGH TEMPERATURE RECORDS CONTINUE TO OUTPACE LOW


NEW HIGH TEMPERATURE RECORDS CONTINUE TO OUTPACE LOW18-06-2020 16:23
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(248)
In a world with a stable temperature (i.e., no net long-term warming or cooling trends) the number of new high temperature records should be statistically consistent with new low temperature records when averaged over time.

When the average temperature of that world changes the normal distribution shifts so there is an imbalance between the two.



We can test what is happening to Earth by checking the data on new high and low temperature records.

Year-to-date:
46,500 new high-temp records
17,000 new low-temp records

Last 365 days:
110,000 new daily highs
47,000 new daily lows

And it has been that way for for over 40 years



Currently we are running at about 2.5:1 over the 2010s.
18-06-2020 16:46
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2060)
Really scraping the bottom of the data barrel...

Official temperature record keeping started in 1898. Mostly major cities, at first, more monitoring stations added every year. Over the past 120 years, there have been several upgrades, more accurate equipment, automated readings... For you assertion, the methods and equipment would need to stay the same. Even though we use better equipment and methods, the margin of error. is still the same as the 1898 measurements (least reliable data). A lot of room to play with...
18-06-2020 16:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7051)
DRKTS wrote:
In a world with a stable temperature (i.e., no net long-term warming or cooling trends) the number of new high temperature records should be statistically consistent with new low temperature records when averaged over time.

In a world of honest people, there would not be gullible morons ignoring huge swaths of data as though they don't exist and then pretending that the only data they recognize is, in fact, reality.

Honest people don't deny that there are glaciers forming and/or growing and that the total is not known since nobody tracks that.

Honest people don't completely deny evaporation of water so as to claim that the ocean is somehow "acidifying." Ignoring evaporation! You've got be kidding.

Honest people don't ignore the equivalent amount of cold records as warm records ... and don't claim to know what is happening over all the ocean as though it somehow doesn't "count."

Honest people admit when they are simply preaching their religion. Christians can demonstrate how it's done. Ask a Christian what he thinks about God and he'll tell you that it's his faith. Ask a warmizombie why he believes what he believes and he'll instantly starts to HATE you for doubting "science" and for being a fugging "denier ashsole."

Warmizombies are dishonest chitheads.





... Oh, DRKTS ... I suppose you quite conveniently don't have the raw data for this either, so we cannot scrutize everything that was omitted, yes?


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
18-06-2020 23:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(12779)
DRKTS wrote:
In a world with a stable temperature (i.e., no net long-term warming or cooling trends) the number of new high temperature records should be statistically consistent with new low temperature records when averaged over time.

Nope. Base rate fallacy.
DRKTS wrote:
When the average temperature of that world changes the normal distribution shifts so there is an imbalance between the two.

Nope. Base rate fallacy. A temperature reading at any weather station is not the temperature of the Earth.
DRKTS wrote:

The temperature of the Earth is not a probability.
DRKTS wrote:
We can test what is happening to Earth by checking the data on new high and low temperature records.

Nope. Base rate fallacy. No weather station is measuring the temperature of the Earth.
DRKTS wrote:
Year-to-date:
46,500 new high-temp records
17,000 new low-temp records
Argument from randU fallacy. You are making shit up.
[quote]DRKTS wrote:
Last 365 days:
110,000 new daily highs
47,000 new daily lows

Lie. Every day at every weather station there is a low and high temperature recorded.
DRKTS wrote:
And it has been that way for for over 40 years

Longer. Weather stations have been around in the United States since the 1800's. They've existed elsewhere in the world since the 1700's. They have since then recorded a daily high and low temperature at each station.
DRKTS wrote:


Currently we are running at about 2.5:1 over the 2010s.

Argument from randU. Bad math.

No argument presented. Denial of mathematics. Base rate fallacies. False authority fallacies.


The Parrot Killer
19-06-2020 10:17
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3260)
DRKTS wrote:


Currently we are running at about 2.5:1 over the 2010s.
This is a brilliant point DRKTS. I wish we had a rebuttal to work with here.
19-06-2020 17:56
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7051)
tmiddles wrote:
DRKTS wrote:


Currently we are running at about 2.5:1 over the 2010s.
This is a brilliant point DRKTS. I wish we had a rebuttal to work with here.

Help me out here. How does one rebut the lack of any point?

DRKTS fabricated some numbers. Anyone can do that.

Btw ... why do you think that makes for a 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
19-06-2020 22:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(12779)
tmiddles wrote:
DRKTS wrote:
...deleted Holy Chart...

Currently we are running at about 2.5:1 over the 2010s.
This is a brilliant point DRKTS. I wish we had a rebuttal to work with here.

RQAA.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate NEW HIGH TEMPERATURE RECORDS CONTINUE TO OUTPACE LOW:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth13205-07-2020 00:00
Measuring the Earth's Surface Temperature501-07-2020 21:45
Once Again, High Temperature Records Outpace Low by a Wide Margin429-06-2020 21:40
Made a graph of low equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates to show that the IPCC's best estimate o203-03-2020 02:17
Here Is Precisely How To Measure Global Average Temperature714-02-2020 01:33
▲ 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