-PJ
Posted on 08/09/2007 12:46:15 PM PDT by impimp1
Looking at the reason for the errors...it looks more like hubris, and no real peer-review.
It appears that whether or not it is occurring depends upon your start and end dates. At least so far, the GISS repairs to their data suggest that the 1930s were very slightly warmer than either the 1990s or 2000s; that the warming trend throm the 1910s to the 1930s was about twice as steep as for the time from the 80s to 2000s; that the 1930s were consistantly warm; and that the annual variation dwarfs the centries worth of warming one year, and completely bleeds off a centuries worth of warming the next.
So...from 1630 to now, it has warmed. from 1901 to now it has warmed. from 1930s to now it has cooled. from 1953 to 2003 it has cooled. from 1970 to now it has warmed. from 1998 to now it has cooled. From 1900 to 2000 it has remained the same (miniscule cooling of -.05C).
NASA guy: "Every coordinate has been changed! Why have they been changed?"
Dish guy: "Because they were wrong."
NASA guy: "Why were they wrong?"
Dish guy: "I don't know."
Dish boss: "No, what about them was wrong."
Dish guy: "Oh, NASA sent us the coordinates for Northern Hemisphere, and we're in the Southern Hemisphere. I can change them back, but we'd be pointing the wrong direction."
Even that is in doubt...WE only this week officially hit 100 degrees. This is the latest date in many years for us to hit that high. In fact, up until just a couple of weeks ago, we were still having highs in the mid-upper 80's which is totally abnormal for us.
So - the whole global warming thing is all about perspective. Some areas may be seeing higher-than-average temps, while others have seen measurably cooler temps.
But there is one thing I am certain of - any temperature changes we may or may not be seeing are NOT caused by man. Short of a massive thermonuclear exchange, I just don't believe that we have that kind of power. Anyone claiming otherwise is suffering from delusions of godhood.
Re post #26
Hear, hear!
The point is, once the data is corrected, any trend that would correspond to any anthropogenic cause is lost. Of course the temperature goes up and down. That’s what planets do.
The overlap between the groups wasn't long enough.
With the Pluto mission, the team members had to be young enough to still have a good probability to be alive, um, around, when New Horizons gets to its objective.
Oh, the reign of Dan Goldin. Bush's fault. Bush 41, that is.
-PJ
I’m a little unsure of your point. Was Proenza a good guy because he wanted to replace a failing satellite with a good one, or was he a bad guy because he wanted to get rid of a good satellite that did important work and replace it with something of less utility.
Incidentally there is an interesting fact about temperatures in the Washington, DC area. Temperatures are currently taken and Reagan National Airport (formerly Washington National Airport), which is alongside the Potomac River. Some years ago temperatures were taken elsewhere, not near the water. Yesterday, the airport temperature wa 101, but the downtown DC temperature was 102.
When I was 16 my family moved. We had been 2 miles from New York City, and moved 30 miles west into the hills of New Jersy. I started recording the daily temperature from the New York weather reports, and from the thermometer outside my window. At the beginning of the winter we were 10 degrees colder than New York. By the end of winter we were only 5 or 6 degrees colder. I concluded at that time this was caused by the fact that the waters around the city cooled off during the winter.
“and Reagan” should read “at Reagan” on my post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.