Posted on 01/07/2014 10:51:07 AM PST by Kaslin
When asked about the pause in temperatures, they claim global warming is now hiding in the deep ocean.
Of course in science heat rises, so for Global Warming to work it must mean heat is magically descending below cold.
Hence Global Warming = Magic
It was 18°F on my porch this morning.................in FLORIDA...................
All based on believing the chain-of-custody of the data from the sensors to the presented documents have in no possible way been altered. Starting at the reader of the sensors all the way through the charts and graphs producers.
That’s if those same sensors have a valid calibration seals and corresponding calibration certifications that also have a chain-of-custody that proves none of them are falsified or altered. All sensors are within the calibration times prior to their expiration and due date for the next calibration.
REAL science is tough. It requires verifiable proof, not just “because I said so”. Including independent organizations launching surprise inspections of the sensors and documentation.
The sensors placement should not be within 200 meters of any manmade structure or any natural cover.
*When asked about the pause in temperatures, they claim global warming is now hiding in the deep ocean.*
It might be hiding in a video game in cyberspace, or in Middle Earth where it’s “millions of degrees”, or it might be hiding in Algore’s gigantic palace.
Some folks assume that these work because of some type of scientific principle, but that is an illusion. They really use magic.
Ever heard of a temperature inversion in the atmosphere? They happen all the time. Happens in the oceans too. That doesn't mean I believe in AGW, it does mean you need to get your facts straight.
Really good science requires double or triple blind methods.
Those devising the study don't collect the data, and those collecting the data don't analyze it. This last group if possible doesn't have a clue what the hypothesis is.
One of the most repeatedly verified results of science is that scientists tend to find what they expect to find if such methods aren't used. Even with the most honest intent in the world, they will subconciously manipulate the data. And, of course, when money, careers and prestige are on the line, the most honest intent doesn't always apply.
Sorry, but this doesn't fit here.
Normally, as one goes up in the atmosphere, the temperature goes down. When hot air heated at the surface rises, it rapidly cools.
In an inversion, warm air traps cold air beneath it. IOW, it illustrates qam1's point, it doesn't refute it.
This is why you don’t put an official NOAA temperature sensor over concrete
Posted on April 21, 2008 by Anthony Watts
THE POLITICAL SCIENCE IS SETTLED.
My bad choice of examples.
Normally, as one goes up in the atmosphere, the temperature goes down.
Actually, around here there is often a marine sublayer that is cooler at lower altitude with warmer air trapping it that then cools off even more at higher altitude, making a sandwich so to speak. The boundaries are rather stark as temperature on my property can vary by 15° from lower elevations to higher.
In the case of the oceans, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation take 30 years or more to complete that does bring colder water to the surface. The warmist claim is that when the PDO last reversed in 1997 the water trapped below is warmer than it otherwise would have been without AGW and that the cooler water now at the surface has not heated yet. At least, that is my minimal understanding of the claim.
Yup, you can’t trust a scientist when his fat government paycheck is in danger.
Of course they have not ventured forth with temperature sensors and long wires to reach this super heated water layer so as to be able to test this bs... so they just have a hypothesis at best. Even if they did... they wouldn’t find it so they would falsify the data... aka hockey stick science.
“Consensus” science is definitionally not science. It’s the combination of a couple of logical fallacies:
1. Argumentum ad numerum or argument or appeal to numbers, and;
2. Argumentum ad vericundiam or argument or appeal to authority.
“Most scientists” can be wrong (and ARE wrong in this case). And those “most scientists” are NOT qualified to make public policy pronouncements.
Essentially “scientists” for all practical purposes became a priesthood, apostles of materialism. And Americans have swallowed most of their biased pronouncements as the scientific truth they ain’t.
1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Debate with “Warmers” exp;oses one to the same risks involves with argueing with fools and drunks.
Even when presented with a flawless hypothesis, they go “Full Pigeon”, and strut about victoriously.
Psittacosis cures Bad Pigeon Behavior.
Defunding cures bad “Warmer” Behavior.
I’ve only got a 6 letter word. :IDIOTS
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.