Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 10/30/2011 6:43:11 AM PDT by Mechanicos
"A story breaking in the UK contends that results obtained by the prof's BEST (Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures) project team, instead of "settling the debate" in favor of warmists, showed that global warming "has stopped." If so, this is potentially as explosive as the "hide the decline" conspiracy uncovered almost two years ago when the Climategate emails surfaced."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
I’ll bet millions in the Northeast are not looking forward to this winter, after the record-smashing October blizzard.
I’ll bet they’d vote for a little global warming for the next 5 months.
Bump for later reading.
WHOOPS!
So what comes 1st — Christmas Day or LameStreamMedia trying to poo - poo Climategate II?
The first 80 years of the temperature record were MADE UP from whole cloth by ONE MAN!
Torture them statistics enough and they’ll confess to anything.
The verb I used was “torture”. I’m a dab hand at statistics, trust me. What the buffoons at CRU were doing is cherry picking data and low pass filtering with whatever filter gave the most appealing plots.
BTW, it is a cardinal sin of statical analysis to correlate two time series and claim a causal relationship. Lots of time series trend with time for whatever reason, with no possible coupling mechanism. For instance, number of letters in the last name of the vice-president of the United States during the first twenty years of the twenty century and the number of radio receivers in U.S. homes both show increases. Therefore, the number of letters in the last name of the vice president causes an increase in the number of radio receivers.
Statistical analysis uses raw data. A good mathematician understands the various results caused by changing the data. Armed with this knowledge, the good statistician can “torture” his inputs until his equations provide the desired result.
In addition, a good mathematician can select which analysis he is going to use to evaluate the data. A simple example would be choosing the mean, mode and median.
Finally, the good mathematician can knowingly use the ignorance of his audience to his advantage. A great demonstration of this is a speaker I heard who was an advocate for low income housing. She said the average person in our state could not afford the median priced home like it was a shocking statistic rather than an expected result.
Read this!
“...89% of the 865 surface reporting station inspected in the US (1221 total mantained by National Weather Service and NOAA) failed to meet standards for reliable data collection”! “...All stations must be at least 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artifical heating or radiating/reflecting heat source...”
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/surfacestationsreport_spring09.pdf
http://www.surfacestations.org/
This makes you a radio denier.
Even 80 years is a tiny sample in geological time. So small as to be irrelevant.
Cut it off at 2007 and a regression analysis will give a mild warming trend, keep all the data, and it's either flat or the outlier in 2010 will produce a mild cooling trend.
Polticians and advocates will knowingly and deliberately interchange the words “average” and “median” to make a point. They will also confuse sets. For instance, the “average person” includes infants, inmates, students, etc. The median priced home is an asset of a family which may include two or more working people, students, infants, ect.
This is further disingenous because the roll of government since the Second World War has been to furiously inflate the housing bubble for as long and big as they could. As some point it had to break. It just happened to be 2007. If the government had taken steps to slowly deflate it around 1995, we might have had a soft(er) landing. Every president and every congress just kicked the can down the road, (to mix a metaphor) hoping it would burst once they left office. W almost made it.
For those who didn’t follow the links, some of the salient features therein:
The BEST studies own data shows flat temperatures over the last decade, a fact conveniently left off the graph released to the press (although the data indicating that leveling off was included in a raw form in their papers). That despite a continual increase in CO2 levels over the same period.
The data presented by BEST involves land surface measurements only (about one quarter of the earth’s surface) - that limitation was justified by the rationalization that the oceans take a long time to warm. But ignoring ocean surface data (three-quarters of the surface) makes the data used more susceptible to “urban heat island” effects and other statistical distortions.
The critic of this BEST study and its promulgation in the press is a department head at Georgia Tech with 30 years in the business, and the second-named author on the BEST papers - one of her complaints is the guy who led the project and spun the results to the press undercut the peer review process by doing so.
Also, half of the homes that are below the median price may be affordable to the rest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.