CLAIM: GLOBAL TEMPS FAKED... http://realclimatescience.com/2016/07/global-temperatures-are-mostly-fake/
Phil spills the beans.
Phil spills the beans.
CLAIM: GLOBAL TEMPS FAKED... http://realclimatescience.com/2016/07/global-temperatures-are-mostly-fake/
Phil spills the beans.
Doesn't mean he is right:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/temperature-monitoring.php
Remember all the fun we had last year over 1995 global temperatures, with the early release of information (via Australia), “inventing” the December monthly value, letters to Nature, etc., etc.?
I think we should have a cunning plan about what to do this year, simply to avoid a lot of wasted time.
Geoff Jenkins (UK Met Office) to Phil Jones
NOAA is the only group left trying to sell the snake oil. Onlu one left the administration controls.And your march towards abject and worshipful ignorance goes on. The fact is that climate science is just making it up as they go....this isn't anything new, or secret...it is one of the most blatant cases of government sponsored fraud in modern history and you just lap it up and continue to believe. Here is another example of what is really going on in climate science.
And when confronted with an admission of fraud straight from the horse's mouth so to speak...what do you do? Why you ask the government agency that is promoting the fraud as if it were real science if the data is reliable?....and when they say...why sure it is....you believe them and repeat to others how honest and trustworthy government agencies are...how much more of a worshipful acolyte could you possibly be?
Your link says that NOAA's study finds that NOAA's data is reliable....are you serious?
Your link says that NOAA's study finds that NOAA's data is reliable....are you serious?
And your article relies on another study done in 19756, almost 40 years ago:
TimesMachine: January 5, 1978 – NYTimes.com
And which NOAA says it has expanded to include more territory.
Do you ever even make an attempt to actually comprehend anything that you see?...
Unlike you I actually read the article you post. My bad. The first "conclusion" your author reaches is based on information from 1976. If you had actually read the article I posted you would have seen that certain changes in technology makes the need for some ground stations unnecessary. Of course, you know everything about everything, so why even try to think you would not be better "informed" then every other "scientist" in the world. All one has to do is ask you:
"Q2: What raw data are available for global temperature monitoring?
The number of land surface weather stations in the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) drops off in recent years. This fact is an indication of our success in adding historical data. Every month data from over 1,200 stations from around the world are added to GHCN as a result of monthly reports transmitted over the Global Telecommunication System. This number is up from what it was a decade ago due to systematic efforts by the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) and others to encourage countries to send in CLIMAT reports. If NCEI relied solely on such data that would be the maximum number of stations available. But we have systematically sought to increase the data holdings in the past through international projects such as the once a decade creation of World Weather Records as well as NCEI's own digitization of select Colonial Era archive data. The creation of the GCOS Surface Network is one example of a specific attempt to both enhance data exchange around the world and to identify and select the 'best' stations for long-term climate change purposes. The weighting scheme used to rate stations for the initial selection in the GSN clearly indicates the biases climatologists have in favor of stations that have been in operation for a long time, that are rural, are agricultural research sites, and are distributed throughout the world with increasing density the farther they are away from the tropics. The result of all these efforts is that GHCN has data for many thousands of stations in the period from the 1950s to the 1990s that cannot be routinely updated, thus the number of stations drops considerably in recent years.
Because 71 percent of the world is covered by oceans, NCEI also has a strong focus on collection of observations over the world's oceans. The global ocean temperature analysis is primarily based on buoy and ship observations from the International Comprehensive Ocean Atmosphere Dataset (ICOADS), while monthly data updates come from the Global Telecommunications System (GTS). NCEI is active in a continuing multi-decadal effort to digitize historical ocean observations that contribute to ICOADS. The number of sea surface temperature observations in ICOADS has increased due to recent digitization by NCEI. Other parts of NOAA are involved in ocean buoy deployments that also contribute to ICOADS and the GTS data streams. NOAA continues to seek to increase the amount of data available for global analyses."