October Smashes Temperature Records Practically Guaranteeing 2015 Will Be HottestYear

[Frankfooter]

Frankfooter spent all of last weekend accusing me of being a "conspiracy theorist"

Hey, if the shoe fits....

You are still insinuating here that the changes in NASA's metrics were 'nefarious'.
By inferring that 2015 is only a record year because of 'changes' at NASA, you infer there is a conspiracy.

That's conspiracy theory talk, buddy.

Feel free to clear it and confirm that the changes at NASA were legit, and I'll consider a respite from your conspiracy label.

 

[Frankfooter]

I don't have to admit to anything.

You are the one spamming that I have a conspiracy theory,...but YOU have yet to define it.

Until you do,...you know what can do,...don't YA.

FAST

That's just it.

I keep asking you to tell us about your conspiracy that climatologists falsify reports for 'ulterior motives', but you just keep refusing.
How can I define your crazy theory for you?
Its all in your head, not mine.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Hey, if the shoe fits....

You are still insinuating here that the changes in NASA's metrics were 'nefarious'.
By inferring that 2015 is only a record year because of 'changes' at NASA, you infer there is a conspiracy.

That's conspiracy theory talk, buddy.

Feel free to clear it and confirm that the changes at NASA were legit, and I'll consider a respite from your conspiracy label.

You're full of crap. The discussion had nothing to do with the nature of the changes or any insinuations about anything.

You said it was a "conspiracy" to claim there wasn't a single pre-adjustment month in NASA's reported anomalies that was a record breaker in 2015.

In fact, you know that what I said was true.

 

[Frankfooter]

You're full of crap. The discussion had nothing to do with the nature of the changes or any insinuations about anything.

You said it was a "conspiracy" to claim there wasn't a single pre-adjustment month in NASA's reported anomalies that was a record breaker in 2015.

In fact, you know that what I said was true.

Then why bring it up at all?


Meanwhile, CBC has an excellent interactive article on climate change.
Very clear and accurate, and they note that this year's global anomaly is 0.85ºC, moviefan.

Read it, and understand what a legit article looks like.

http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/2degrees/

 

[FAST]

That's just it.

I keep asking you to tell us about your conspiracy that climatologists falsify reports for 'ulterior motives', but you just keep refusing.
How can I define your crazy theory for you?
Its all in your head, not mine.

,..."climatologists falsify reports",...

That"s your conspiracy theory,...not mine.

FAST

 

[Frankfooter]

,..."climatologists falsify reports",...

That"s your conspiracy theory,...not mine.

FAST

Then you agree that the reports sourced by the IPCC reports are legit and accurate, with no 'fudging of numbers' for any 'ulterior motives'?

 

[AK-47]

Frankfoot, are you of the opinion that any fiddling with temperature data belongs to conspiracy kookery, and that global warming scientists would never do that??

Simple question, yes or no??

 

[Frankfooter]

Frankfoot, are you of the opinion that any fiddling with temperature data belongs to conspiracy kookery, and that global warming scientists would never do that??

Simple question, yes or no??

If by 'fiddling' you mean falsifying the data, then yes.
But if by 'fiddling' you mean continuing to work towards making the process for assimilating global reports more accurately, then I say no.

Fortunately all the changes to metrics are clear and reported clearly, with the full data available for confirmation.

 

[AK-47]

If by 'fiddling' you mean falsifying the data, then yes

Yes, I meant falsifying data. So if a reputable newspaper showed evidence there had indeed falsifying of data been going on, they would be classified as kooks in your opinion correct??

Might wanna read this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...icked-with-flawed-data-on-global-warming.html

And this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ear...data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html

Even though the original wordpress blogger was a relatively unknown journalist, all the stories in his article have been independently verified by The Telegraph. So please dont come and say those sources are not credible or are kooks, because then you start to lose credibility Frankfoot

 

[AK-47]

El nino effect this year ..weather changes and also we are still in fall. Note first day of winter in Dec 21, 2015 and you remember last winter 2015 was really so unbelieveable cold!

I just looked it up and you are indeed right, its the second strongest El Nino on record since 1997, so we could be in for a very mild winter followed by heavy snowfalls and much colder temperatures in late February sometime

 

[Frankfooter]

Yes, I meant falsifying data. So if a reputable newspaper showed evidence there had indeed falsifying of data been going on, they would be classified as kooks in your opinion correct??

The telegraph is reputable, but the author of that article not so much.
Here's a very clear and good explanation of why the temperatures were adjusted.
Watch it and tell me you still think they were up to no good.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Here's a very clear and good explanation of why the temperatures were adjusted.

This is hilarious.

Up until today, Franky had no idea that NASA and the NOAA include sea-surface temperatures in their calculations of the global temperature anomalies.

The Hadcrut numbers are lower then NOAA and NASA in general, since they include sea surface temperature while the others do air temperatures.

https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=5411862#post5411862

That means he has no understanding of the adjustments to the sea-surface temperatures, or how those adjustments were used to alter the overall numbers.

He is completely ignorant.

Yet, in spite of his total ignorance, he has been saying that anyone who questions the adjustments is a "conspiracy theorist."

Frankfooter is a total bullshit artist. He doesn't understand any of this stuff. His accusations against others are completely baseless.

If he had even the slightest bit of dignity and self-worth, he would apologize to every TERB member that he has maligned.

 

[Frankfooter]

This is hilarious.

Up until today, Franky had no idea that NASA and the NOAA include sea-surface temperatures in their calculations of the global temperature anomalies.

Yes, been quite a day, two errors in one day.
I was checking some info on Bobtisdale and didn't check to see where it came from, my mistake, let some shoddy denier pass the shit detector this morning.
My mistake.

NASA, NOAA and Hadcrut all use SST (surface sea temperatures) in their models.

I apologize, you see how easy it is to accidentally let some bullshit info pass from the denier sites, eh?

Lets just go back to looking at NASA's data, since that's the basis of our bet.
Still think this chart doesn't show increasing temperature?

 

[Moviefan-2]

I apologize, you see how easy it is to accidentally let some bullshit info pass from the denier sites, eh?

You're blaming Bob Tisdale for the fact that you don't know what you're talking about?

 

[Moviefan-2]

Lets just go back to looking at NASA's data, since that's the basis of our bet.

I've told you a million times -- we'll go through the data when you agree to settle up.

Until then, I have no interest in arguing for the sake of arguing -- particularly when you have clearly proven today that you have no idea what you're talking about.

When it's time for me to collect, I'll be more than happy to explain the numbers to you.

 

[AK-47]

The telegraph is reputable, but the author of that article not so much

So the Telegraph is reputable, but its columnists are not?? That makes no sense, sorry

Here's a very clear and good explanation of why the temperatures were adjusted.
Watch it and tell me you still think they were up to no good.

Tell me something, how would you be able to calibrate temperatures going back 20 or 30 years??
And how would you know whether to calibrate up or down??

It seems the global warming faithers always have an excuse when NOAA or Met Office fiddles with the data.
They came up with all kinds of similar excuses when Climategate first came out.

I'm starting to wonder if they're just trying to cover their asses when they get caught.

 

[Frankfooter]

I've told you a million times -- we'll go through the data when you agree to settle up.

Nope, just whining more won't help you.
We're going to discuss it and watch it as you slowly lose the bet.
Its so close now, only 0.005º off of the target.

 

[Frankfooter]

Tell me something, how would you be able to calibrate temperatures going back 20 or 30 years??
And how would you know whether to calibrate up or down??

Did you watch the video, they explained it quite clearly.

 

[AK-47]

Did you watch the video, they explained it quite clearly.

They recalibrated by comparing Paraguay temperatures to weather stations from surrounding countries. This is not proper science, I'm sorry

 

[Frankfooter]

They recalibrated by comparing Paraguay temperatures to weather stations from surrounding countries. This is not proper science, I'm sorry

Is that because the re-calibration went up, not down?

They compared the stations to those nearby, do you really think that temperatures changes follow borders exactly?
Do you think what they did was dishonest?
They showed you exactly what they did.