Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Dr. James Hansen, reveal the algorithms employed to manipulate the raw data for a skeptical audience.
1 posted on 08/21/2007 9:04:44 PM PDT by ricks_place
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: ricks_place

GIGO


2 posted on 08/21/2007 9:09:28 PM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
Usufruct?

No. Mesofruct!

4 posted on 08/21/2007 9:29:49 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place

These are not the words of a scientist but the ravings of an extremist, defaming those who dare disagree with his very dubious hyperbolic fearmongering..

“The danger is that delay will cause tipping points to be passed, such that large climate impacts become inevitable, including the loss of all Arctic sea ice, destabilization of the West Antarctic ice sheet with disastrous sea level rise later this century” .... This is unadulterated BS. there is no ‘tipping point’ in CO2, in fact CO2 impact get diminished at higher levels; in fact, there is no scientific justification for the ‘runaway’ scenario he paints.

Yes, lets see his algorithmic adjustments to the temperature data that helps make the model fit the conclusion.


9 posted on 08/21/2007 11:06:40 PM PDT by WOSG ( Don't tell me what you are against, tell me what you are FOR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
Hansen is not telling the whole story about this "innocent error".

There were more changes introduced by this "error" than just the post-2000 ones. All of these "errors" were favourable to the AGW cause.

The changes made the post-2000 cooling period look warmer, they smoothed out the cooling of the 1970s, they bumped 1998's temp UP not down, they made the biggest reduction in temps to the other warm years such as 1934, 1937, 1921 and 1953. These years (and 1931 as well which wasn't adjusted by as much) were the other contenders for the record warm year along with 1998.

Awfully convienent "errors".


13 posted on 08/22/2007 7:21:03 AM PDT by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place; Killing Time; Beowulf; Mr. Peabody; RW_Whacko; honolulugal; SideoutFred; Ole Okie; ...


FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH


much to digest..
14 posted on 08/22/2007 7:36:43 AM PDT by xcamel (FDT/2008 -- talk about it >> irc://irc.freenode.net/fredthompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place

Get this guy a big tent and a collection plate...


15 posted on 08/22/2007 7:40:24 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
Basic References:

Lawrence Solomon's "The Deniers" (a series of articles on the view of scientists who have been labelled "Global Warming Deniers"):

Other References:


17 posted on 08/22/2007 8:03:56 AM PDT by sourcery (fRed Dawn: Wednesday, 5 November 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
Gotta be the longest translation of "fake but accurate" I've seen yet.

If this guy's graded by word-count, he wins.

19 posted on 08/22/2007 12:10:25 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Did Dennis Kucinich always look like that or did he have to submit to a series of shots? [firehat])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
Here is a chart showing how much the National Climate Data Centre (NCDC) adjusts the raw temperature data.

The NCDC is the depository for all climate records from around the planet.

Up to 1999, they had already adjusted the data upwards from the raw temperature records by 0.55C. The increase in global temperatures as of 1999 was only 0.6C so you make your own conclusions.

Of course, Hansen and GISS then take these numbers and adjust them even more. There have also been adjustments made after 1999 which is not charted so nicely and released to the public.


21 posted on 08/22/2007 6:44:13 PM PDT by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
Where exactly did they get the gobal temperatures in 1921 and 1934? The ocean temperatures were sampled from...? How many global sample sites and how many readings in 1921 and 1934?
22 posted on 08/22/2007 6:57:47 PM PDT by listenhillary (millions crippled by the war on poverty....but we won't pull out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ricks_place
The contrarians will be remembered as court jesters. There is no point to joust with court jesters. They will always be present. They will continue to entertain even if the Titanic begins to take on water. Their role and consequence is only as a diversion from what is important.

Arrogant bastard. Am I paying his salary? Why?

23 posted on 08/22/2007 7:04:20 PM PDT by listenhillary (millions crippled by the war on poverty....but we won't pull out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson