Society/Culture Historical temperature record proving climate change a result of fraudulent statistics?

[bit_pattern]

Someone doesn't get the concept of peer review.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

And have you ever considered that maybe there have been a few technological advances since 1989? There could be any number of reasons why there are less surface stations in use. Instead of playing an amateur game of 'gotchya', why don't you ask someone at BOM or GISS why they use less stations? You might be surprised to find there are factors that you simply aren't taking into acampaigner. It wouldn't be the first time for wannabe amateur Internet Scientists.

You should get a job or something, or stop wasting your bosses time

 

[bit_pattern]

Oh, and you do realise that by 'Melbourne' they mean Melbourne airport, no? Not exactly CBD, not a great deal of UHI out there mate.

 

[HarryTiger]

I thought you'd be happy, the second half of the century is clearly warmer than the first. And recently there's an obvious spike up. Wasn't it steep enough for your liking?

If you make a criticism without looking at NASA's data you are called ignorant and pointed to NASA's data.

If you examine NASA's data and make no criticism then you're guilty of trying to be a amateur scientist. As if it's that complicated anyway.

And if you post 1/4 as many posts as BP does you're spending too much time on the forum.

Guess what BP, temperature readings are the primary data source for temperature analysis. You too can be a climate scientist!

 

[HarryTiger]

There's 2 Melbournes. There's Laverton as well which is in a similar area to Tulla.

Could be a few warm gases floating around airports huh?

 

[EasternTiger]

HarryTiger that graph you posted is interesting. I was discussing Melbourne summers with a few friends. The consensus was the 80's summers were great, the 90's summers were generally shit with less proper beach-worthy days, and recently a return to the summers of old.

Exactly what the graph showed.

Maybe it's not just the 80's music that's making another comeback

 

[bit_pattern]

I thought you'd be happy, the second half of the century is clearly warmer than the first. And recently there's an obvious spike up. Wasn't it steep enough for your liking?

What on earth are you on about? You're the one who has a problem with BOM's temp stations.

If you make a criticism without looking at NASA's data you are called ignorant and pointed to NASA's data.

If you examine NASA's data and make no criticism then you're guilty of trying to be a amateur scientist. As if it's that complicated anyway.

No, if you make ignorantly unfounded criticisms without understanding all of the factors in play, then you get called ignorant.

As for amateur, what, you think that looking at a couple of dozen temperature statio records makes you a professional? Uhhh, OK then...

And if you post 1/4 as many posts as BP does you're spending too much time on the forum.

I was actually talking about you poring over the lifespan of temp stations and entering the data into a spreadsheet.

Guess what BP, temperature readings are the primary data source for temperature analysis. You too can be a climate scientist!

Yeah, says it all really, if you think that's what climate scientists do then it's little wonder you think global warming is teh lies.

And, because you won't do it I took a moment to email BOM myself with a number of questions. If I get a reply i'll post in here just for you.

 

[bit_pattern]

Could be a few warm gases floating around airports huh?

Yes, gasses, that's what causes UHI

 

[cancat]

BF is my blog. It's even been cited by real blog scientists

http://rabett.blogspot.com/2009/10/ian-plimer-is-con-artist-one-of.html

distinguished senior member

LOL - at least they got one word in three right

 

[bit_pattern]

Haha, nice one CC, I'll pay that

 

[evo]

BF is my blog. It's even been cited by real blog scientists

http://rabett.blogspot.com/2009/10/ian-plimer-is-con-artist-one-of.html

Bit pattern, a distinguished senior member

Edit : oh cancat shares my mirth.

 

[smash_cka]

Summary
1: In 1998, a paper is published by Dr. Michael Mann, then at the University of Virginia, now a Penn State climatologist, and co-authors Bradley and Hughes. The paper is named: Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations. The paper becomes known as MBH98.

‘Climategate’ inquiry shows scientist didn’t falsify data

Mike De Souza, Canwest News Service Published: Wednesday, February 03, 2010

An academic inquiry into the so-called "climategate" email scandal has concluded that a well-known U.S. scientist did not directly or indirectly falsify data in his research.

The review, by a panel of senior administrators at Pennsylvania State University, found no evidence that climatologist Michael Mann had manipulated research that indicates humans are causing global warming. However, the panel has recommended further review on questions about whether his conduct had undermined public confidence in his findings as a scientist.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2518632

 

[skilts]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2518632

hotly debated topic of enormous social impact

Well there's no doubt about the openmindedness with which the university approached its investigations. If they were being evenhanded they would have also said "or nothing of any importance whatsoever".

 

[smash_cka]

Or they could also have said "purple monkey dishwasher", but they didn't. Seems a lot of people in the media and on the internet thought it was of "enourmous impact" when those involved were being accused of misdoings, but now they've been cleared it isn't of "any importance whatsoever". It's a real tough gig working climate science these days, a real tough gig, damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

[skilts]

Or they could also have said "purple monkey dishwasher", but they didn't. Seems a lot of people in the media and on the internet thought it was of "enourmous impact" when those involved were being accused of misdoings, but now they've been cleared it isn't of "any importance whatsoever". It's a real tough gig working climate science these days, a real tough gig, damned if you do and damned if you don't.

At least the scientists have the option of getting an honest job.

 

[smash_cka]

So no matter how many times they are exonerated, they're still not honest? It's easy to see where you stand.

 

[skilts]

So no matter how many times they are exonerated, they're still not honest? It's easy to see where you stand.

I make no pretence of independently investigating malpractice by academics.

 

[smash_cka]

So now it's not just the academics who are "dishonest" but Penn State University? Throw enough shit and it sticks, I guess. Who do you think is "independent" enough to investigate this guy then? Joe McCarthy maybe? He's dead, but I'm sure you could find his political successors easily enough.

 

[Chief]

hotly debated topic of enormous social impact

Well there's no doubt about the openmindedness with which the university approached its investigations. If they were being evenhanded they would have also said "or nothing of any importance whatsoever".

You're just showing your bias against science here.

It is a hotly debated topic. It has had enormous social impact, even if it is shown in future to be unfounded.