IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New You're grasping at straws again.
Why is noaa turning down many of the arctic sensors when that is an area of most concern?


The supplementary data from the paper is here. It says:

Therefore, our estimate of the additional warming over recent decades in the arctic, not included in our primary global analysis, is likely to be an underestimate of the actual warming. However, because our data date back to 1880, further investigation (beyond the scope of this analysis) is required to demonstrate the optimum interpolation approach for both short and long periods in data-sparse, high-latitude regions.


Similarly with your other questions.

Happy hunting. ;-)

Cheers,
Scott.
New keep on keeping on.
any "scientist" who ignores data selectively to their bias needs to have questions asked.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
New Asked and answered. :-)
That warming has been fastest in the northern latitudes isn't in dispute.

E.g.

They didn't "ignore data to suit their bias" or whatever.

The climate datasets are public and freely available. You're welcome to do your own analysis if you think they're wrong.

http://gosic.org/

HTH.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Imagining conspiracy/thus perfect secrecy ... across such masses of the quite demonstrably 'numerate'
(or the idea of confirmation bias and other memes-du-jour)
is the stuff of a mindset, not of: a rational awareness of ... the irrationality of many folks' jelloware.
Especially since: much of the average jelloware remains innumerate by any measure.

All you need do is Look Around/while evading your own confirmation-bias. Can ya manage that?
New what secrecy? They stated exactly what numbers they wanted to changed to get their prefered results?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Expand Edited by boxley June 15, 2015, 11:23:00 AM EDT
     Science: Global warming "pause" didn't happen. - (Another Scott) - (8)
         yup, correct the numbers to get the results you want - (boxley) - (7)
             They do this for a living. Do you? - (Another Scott) - (6)
                 They do this for a living, why yes they do - (boxley) - (5)
                     You're grasping at straws again. - (Another Scott) - (4)
                         keep on keeping on. - (boxley) - (3)
                             Asked and answered. :-) - (Another Scott)
                             Imagining conspiracy/thus perfect secrecy ... across such masses of the quite demonstrably 'numerate' - (Ashton) - (1)
                                 what secrecy? They stated exactly what numbers they wanted to changed to get their prefered results? -NT - (boxley)

Bring out yer dead!
42 ms