Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Regarding the sensors, temperatures are often measured by satellites these days, i.e. without sensors on the ground. Satellites can measure temps across huge areas, which would be impossible with sensors.
The AGW alarmists do not like the satellite data, even though they agree that it is a more accurate source of this information, because it does not support their alarmist hypothesis. So, therefore they use the less accurate ground data, and then adjust that manually to make it show what they want it to show.
Are you serious? Psychics such as Edgar Cayce? You actually think this is science???
The sad part is that some of his predictions have been more accurate than climate predictions. The computer models have not even been close. That is why they have to be "adjusted".
You don't seem to realize that climate science is a debauched field. It is run by parasitic and non-productive human beings who feed at the suckling teet of state-provided grant money. Armageddonism rules and it's publish or perish. A scientist is someone who relentlessly and diligently pursues truth. A climate scientist is basically a welfare queen. A climate scientist is not a scientist at all, and should not be respected in today's environment. A climate scientist in 2018 is a political scientist. Debauched.
The problem with this is that valid climate science will not be able to be distinguished from fake news climate science for quite some time.
Therefore, the only path open to those who value freedom is to obstruct to the greatest degree possible, and point out that climate scientists are not real scientists..
Debauched. The field is debauched. It's tragic really.
I won't go quite that far. But I will say this: Climate change people have an agenda. They want to keep the money flowing in, under any conditions. And they have been caught altering data, in order to make their conclusions look better.
Regarding the sensors, temperatures are often measured by satellites these days, i.e. without sensors on the ground. Satellites can measure temps across huge areas, which would be impossible with sensors.
Which means that records are not comparable to the past, unless you can dig up a satellite scan of a similar area from the 1800's.
The thermometers were not particularly accurate during the 1800's either.
Sorry, but you need to let that argument go..... Temperature readings taken from precise mercury thermometers in use by the U.S. Weather Bureau in the late 1800s were more accurate than readings provided by today's electronic thermometers.
The sad part is that some of his predictions have been more accurate than climate predictions. The computer models have not even been close. That is why they have to be "adjusted".
Oh really? Which predictions (guesses) are those?....It's a sign of desperation when you deniers are now citing so called psychics and calling it science....
Sorry, but you need to let that argument go..... Temperature readings taken from precise mercury thermometers in use by the U.S. Weather Bureau in the late 1800s were more accurate than readings provided by today's electronic thermometers.
The point being that you're still creating a "hockey stick" by means of engrafting thermometer records onto proxy data.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.