GOHEAVY.COM Forums
We have made several changes to our policy here at GOHEAVY. Here they are:
  • POST WITH YOUR REAL NAME (FIRST & LAST!)
  • POST WITH YOUR REAL EMAIL ADDRESS
  • NO FLAMES
  • NO ADS
  • NO TROLLING
  • PLEASE KEEP BAD LANGUAGE TO A MINIMUM
The moderators of this forum reserve the right to delete any post that is deemed inappropriate for this forum.

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

GOHEAVY.COM Debates Forum

Re: nope. the most reliable

Posted By: Doug P (gw.edgecombe.cc.nc.us)
Date: Monday, March 10, 2008, @ 7:02 a.m.

In Response To: nope. the most reliable (Scott Slaterly)

http://www.john-daly.com/ges/surftmp/surftemp.htm

http://www.junkscience.com/GMT/compareNCDC.html

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/papers/jclim96/

http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/global_temp.html

These all came off the first page of a google search. Typically I wouldn't use a dot com when addressing an issue such as this, but John Daly isn't just a pundit....
The point of the included links is this: before anyone jumps on any bandwagon on any topic, it serves one well to look at all the facets. Surface temperatures from surface-based stations are unreliable at best. Balloon-mounted sensors work well, but are limited to the troposphere, and do not have the "density" to give whole-picture ideas of the entire planet. Satellite-based thermal imagery gives a good compromise for whole-planet vs. whole troposphere. Combining the balloons with the satellites is far more accurate than any surface-based system, since any effect from human interaction is pretty much eliminated.
Using balloons plus satellites, the "warming trend" is far less than the surface methods indicate. It's real, but only a fraction of what the alarmists want folks to believe.
Any earth temperature measuring system still shows the earth is warming within one standard deviation of any major climate shift in the past, and likely not as warm as in the past. I'll give you a bit of trivia: one standard deviation is the holy grail for high quality manufacturing. Six standard deviations (plus or minus three) is considered mighty fine quality control.

So Scott, all I have to offer is this: take one step back and look at the big picture. Forget oil, forget tree huggers, and all points in between. Take a look at reliability and repeatability, take a look at long temperature trends, take a look at the effect of CO2 on things like plants which may not complain that they have more of "their" air to breathe, then take a deep breath and re-assess. If you still come to the same conclusions you have now, all is fine and good.

God Bless.

Password:

Messages In This Thread

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

GOHEAVY.COM Debates Forum is maintained by Administrator with WebBBS 5.12.