Freezing tropical islands, boiling towns, and ships hundreds of miles inland. The first-ever audit of temperature data used by the IPCC to reach its ridiculous conclusions shows hundreds of absurd anomalies and zero quality control.

6
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
5 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
CO2InsanityPsychoDadNot so silentwhiskeyriverPlainsman Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
CO2Insanity
Admin

We only have 12 years…..again.

PsychoDad
Member

I’ll tell you something else about those seawater temperatures, having been responsible for them myself in the past as a merchant marine officer. Today, and maybe since the 60s or 70s, I’d say they’re reasonably accurate and reliable, since they’re taken by automatic remote sensor at point of intake. Oh, a ship always has seawater intake for the very simple purpose of helping cool the engines, just like a car radiator. So the engineers want to know what the actual water temp coming in is pretty accurately, since nobody wants engines to overheat and shut down on their watch. Now depending on a number of things, the water coming in MAY pick up maybe a bit of heat, from intense sun heating the whole hull where the intake is and making it actually warmer. However what happens is the engineer on watch records the temp in the engine log, and the mate calls down to the engineer at the end of HIS watch to record the temp in the deck logbook. Now. The way it used to be — at the end of the watch, the mate would send one of his unlicensed crewman, such as an ordinary seaman, down to the deck to literally pull up a bucket of seawater from over the side. The seaman would then carry the bucket up to the wheelhouse, where the mate would stick a thermometer in it to get the temp and log it. Now this mate, although an officer, is just a guy trying to wrap up his day’s work, with a dozen other things to log and do before turning over the watch to his relief. He aint gonna care a whole lot about the water temperature, so those readings are lucky to be within a half a degree, and I’d bet a lot were a degree or more out just from reading the dam thing wrong. Another tidbit, most of the time you aren’t interested in the actual temperature as much as local trends – warmer temps can tell you when you’re right in the Gulf Stream, which makes for a faster passage eastbound to Europe, but most importantly, when you’re in far northern latitudes when a quickly dropping water temperature can indicates icebergs. I think that’s mentioned in “A Night To Remember”, in fact.

All to the point, pre-1970 temps are likely going to be out a degree or so any which way. MAYBE the error DOES all average out. In which case, no point trying to “correct” them. Otherwise you’ve got NO IDEA which way they might be in error, and so any sort of correction is futile.

And also, as the linked article so clearly points out, there are YUUUUGE swatches of time and ocean for which there just ARE no readings. Any. At all. How do you correct for THAT, HadCrud?

Not so silent
Member
Not so silent

Kids this kind of stuff is what happens when you smoke crack, and then try to be all scientific….

Plainsman
Member
Plainsman

It’s a big ass con job. Trillions spent on SAVING THE PLANET, but it was nothing more than income redistribution!

whiskeyriver
Member
whiskeyriver

Politicians pay con artists to “create” weather patterns that fit what the politician wants the patterns to say so they can keep the sheeple all stirred up and scared. The sheeple, of course, start baaing about something needing to be done and only a politician can make meaningful changes to save the planet.

It’s a perpetual money machine for a few and a reelection winner for the real crooks.

Joe Redfield
Member
Joe Redfield

“We don’t need no stinking data!”