[OT] NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal Record-Shattering Global Warm Temperatures in 2015

On a sunny day (Thu, 21 Jan 2016 04:34:56 -0800 (PST)) it happened snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in :

.35 degrees in 100 years, so 100 / .35 say 30,000 years we will all be boiling hot. Jesus must have been very cold.

It is all bullshit, and set by this:

tax the weather!

Wonder how thode big dinos could keep warm.

Little ice age:

They know shit, but know how to tax it.

Long time ago it happned like this:

Dinos dies from over taxation.

You're assuming that the cause of climate changes have always existed and are having the same constant effects.

On a sunny day (Thu, 21 Jan 2016 06:33:36 -0800 (PST)) it happened snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in :

Read the links I gave, and then you will see you are being had by 0banana.

Sounds like the standard "it's Obama's fault" response. Besides, I questio n the some of links you provided. Exactly how reputable is "world-mysterie s.com"? Sounds like entertaining reading material to take with a grain of salt. And the one from CUNY is broken.

I think NASA is more trustworthy.

On a sunny day (Thu, 21 Jan 2016 07:56:22 -0800 (PST)) it happened snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in :

Well, you should knwo how to add wave forms, scrol ldown.

Yes, sciebce can be very entertaining.

Probably sabotaged by the man from affrica.

Yea, and taxpayer funded.

Did you buy weapons of mass destruction in Iraq too?

Politcics is about manuplitating the masses.

NASA is a bunch of losers that need a Russian taxy to go up a few hunded miles. the days of moonlandings and travel to other planets are long gone, you need German engineers for that. All that is left now of NASA is artist impressions. The ones from Hollywood are much more realistic, and actually make money, unlike NASA just spending it.

That what inspired humanity in those long ago days is no more. The hope is now on China.

What's absurd is that NASA once touted satellite data as the ultimate accurate way to measure global temperature. And this "warmest year" claim did not use satellite data.

The global map shows the hottest area as being over Siberia and China and west Canada/Alaska, precisely where there is the least instrumentation and the least likelyhood that there was accurate instrumentation in 1880.

Satellite records show 2015 as the third warmest year in only the last

1. We should have launched a network of weather satellites in 1880. NASA doesn't trust satellites.

The surface records are highly suspect and mightily adjusted.

miles.

Whatever. It's pretty amazing the claims that can be made when the institu tion(s) that have proven to be technologically and scientifically competent are regarded as the opposite simply because they are taxpayer funded. Thi s includes public universities (tax funded) that have produced all sorts of technology and medical advancements that not even you could claim are made

-up or false.

It's insane to imagine that we have 100 years of accurate surface temperature records.

The best cure for all the scams (and political correctness) is to stop ALL taxpayer funding to universities.

You'll say, "What about private universities?" You aren't paying attention... in the US they receive 100's of billions from the feds.

If that were to happen (it won't) man-caused climate change would disappear overnight.

Instead, the ignorati (who believe this BS) will (fortunately) bear the brunt of these scams which funnel taxes from the gullible into the hands of the elite.

Lest you think it's the oil companies behind the BS I suggest you google on "climate change" and "follow the money". ...Jim Thompson

I sure hope you're right. I sincerely do.

On a sunny day (Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:24:27 -0800 (PST)) it happened snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in :

strawman

d miles.

tution(s) that have proven to be technologically and scientifically compete nt are regarded as the opposite simply because they are taxpayer funded. T his includes public universities (tax funded) that have produced all sorts of technology and medical advancements that not even you could claim are ma de-up or false.

I've had friends and family work there.

1. NASA's mission is political.

"NASA chief Charles Bolden's remarks caused a stir among commentators.

'When I became the NASA administrator, (President Obama) charged me with three things,' Bolden said in the interview which aired last week. 'One, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering.' "

1. They're not scientific, reliable, or competent. Try watching the testimony at the Challenger inquest. Massive incompetent bureaucracy, layer after layer, etc. That's how you launch a shuttle all the engineers knew would blow.

This lot are self-confessed propagandists.

That's not a basis to reject their claims, just a reason to check first.

Cheers, James Arthur

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 8:24:10 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote: [about temperature measurement]

Sure; if there's suspicion with cause, your algorithms are adjusted to compensate for the predictable effects. That's the RIGHT thing to do. It's called "calibration".

If there were NO cause to apply compensation to the raw data, it would be WRONG to adjust it. Glad we've ruled out that scenario!

Or fudging.

I'll trust the satellite data, where 2015 was not the hottest year.

Not imagination, observation. The mercury-in-glass thermometer dates back to the early 1700s, and we're all familiar with fever thermometers that can split a tenth of a C. Heck, Georg Ohm got electric power from temperature differences and a thermocouple, because temperatures were much easier to regulate than voltages!

Pull up your favorite weather model, and see if it squares with old temperature readings and reported weather. I think it will, because your great-grandparents weren't as careless as you seem to believe.

Right, agreed, but that was measurement. The OP link cites 'analysis.'

Cheers, James Arthur

Except a minor problem... WHAT are you measuring... the perturbation of your own fart ?>:-} ...Jim Thompson

This link (from NASA!) explains how you're wrong. A leprechaun came along in 1997 and, magically, directed all the excess heat into the oceans. Coincidentally, that was the same year warming paused. Q.E.D.

See, that's scientific.

Cheers, James

Those few mercury manually-read thermometers were located in less-populated places, in Stevenson boxes covered with low-emissivity metallic-oxide whitewash.

Now we use RTDs, in latex-painted boxes, located in cities and airports.

It's really hard to get consistent air temperature measurements.

Of course weather models agree with (adjusted) temperature records. They are tuned to do so. The issue is whether they are predictive of future temperatures, and so far they have been miserably wrong.

It's easy to predict the past. Predicting the future is tougher.