Like most idiots on the left, they made comments without actually reading what the challenge was and my previous comments on the challenge.
So let me take their criticisms and spell it out really slooooow so that even a moron can understand it.
Gordie over at Taxmanblog uses an absurd argument that monthly temperatures from this year somehow debunk global warming science.
First, the challenge is for an entire year. My scoring system is done monthly because I don't have the time to assign points daily as I did last year. At the end of the year, we'll go back an do an average of all the highs and lows for the entire year.
Of course, when you're looking at warming trends you need to look at a much larger picture. To better understand the absurdity of looking at temps from one year, take a look at the graph below & see how the average global temperature is unmistakably rising.
Yeah, let's look at that graph.
Now, if you believe in this graph you see that this graph has a large spike at the end of the axis which means averages on this would tend to be low since we have roughly 80 years of low temperatures with a spike at the end. (by the way, there was no source assigned to this clown's graph so it probably came out of the Gorical Bible - Book of Al, chapter 13, verse 74)
Think of it in these elementary terms. This is how the above graph lays out in basic numbers.
So if you believe that we are in one of these spikes, then these averages work in your favor since the numbers are actually skewed on the low side because of so many years of low temperatures.
Obviously, I'm taking in one reading from one site. But the last I could tell the Greater Cincinnati Airport was still on planet earth so I would have to think that if we have global warming on the globe, it should include parts if not all of Cincinnati.
My challenge has never been set out to prove or disprove global warming. As I said last January, the cool side won last year but it was a fifty fifty probability. I get that.
But if you are a Branch Gorvidian, this is a can't lose. I've set up a scenario that's actually stacked in your favor. And wouldn't it be great to steal some money from the great Gordon Gekko.
If you have the guts.
As an aside, as I've gone through and calculated the score every month, I find it kind of wild that there have been very few high temperature records set in the 2000's. Now if global warming were occurring, don't you think that we'd have more than a statistical average number of record temperatures set in the last decade?
3 comments:
Gordon,
I know you used "idiots on the left" as a rhetorical description of the Branch Gorevidian that completely misrepresented what you wrote, but in this case, it is also an accurate description.
The Branch Gorevidians who dissed you are actually Don & Chris, hosts of a liberal talk radio program on WXUT in Toledo, the radio station of the University of Toledo. It's also interesting that this station shares the airwaves with the Toledo Public Schools, which makes their authority to speak on global warming issues somewhat suspect.
It was interesting on their blog site that they trash the report by Dr. Alan Carlin (PhD, MIT), a very well-respected economist and researcher that has worked at EPA for 37 years. Now, I would also suspect that Dr. Carlin is much more qualified to speak on issues of climate matters than Al Gore, a lifetime politician, or Don & Chris, wannabe's that can't find an audience outside of the most liberal college campus in Ohio.
I am also going to bet that Don & Chris have not read Mr. Carlin's report, otherwise, they would be able to see that they made 4 glaring misstatements of fact in their blog piece that they would not have made had they read the 96-page report P.S., I have read the entire report and it pretty well shows that man's contribution to a slight warming (1 degree in the past century, 70% of which occurred before 1930)does not exist.
No man-made global crisis means no federal dollars or control over our lives and livelihoods. No wonder idiots like Don & Chris would spew lies about reports they have not read as easily as they misrepresented what you wrote (and I presume did read).
Truth does triumph. That is why there are now 31,000 of the top scientists in the world who do NOT believe global climate change is due to mankind, while less than 600 signed on to the IPCC report from the UN. Don't worry too much about folks like Don & Chris. They are just what you said they are, and don't deserve as much attention as we have given them.
Keep telling the truth, Gordon, and exposing the lies.
Scott S.
Gordon,
I looked for the graph that Don & Chris posted on their blog which showed temperatures rising per the graph. You correctly noted that there was no reference. This graph appears to have come from models of what the temperature SHOULD be based on models using atmospheric CO2 data, not what they ACTUALLY were.
From the NASA website, I found data for the past 10 years which shows that the earth has actually cooled during this period, and that only in 3 months did the actual temperature even approach the recorded high temperatures and in no case, did they exceed them. In fact, during this period, the global temperatures were within the high/low band, again showing that global warming, as described by the Gorevidians, is a farce.
Also, there is an organization that is charged with quantifying the accuracy of the 1775 monitoring stations around the world.
http://www.surfacestations.org/
Their finding is that only 11% of the stations have an accuracy of better than +/- 1degC (that is 1.8 degF for you linerals that never took math or science courses).
A whopping 58% have an error in the range of +/-2 to 5 degC! 11% have an error of GREATER than 5 degC! So why are we worried about an 0.8 degF (0.5 degC) rise in temperature when the data we are using is so flawed? My guess is that even if the data is flawed and incorrect, it supports the beliefs of those who choose to use it for their own purposes.
Use of data recorded from space (only done for a short period of time) shows that the earth is actually cooling (NASA data available at NASA.gov). Global alarmists don't like to use this data since it doesn't support their position. I am a man of science: show me the data and I will form an opinion based on the facts the data presents, not the other way around.
My prediction is that the global alarmists will go the way of the "flat earthers"; sounded reasonable at the time, but dead wrong once the data was there.
Scott S.
Scott
I appreciate the background information on your comments.
you've done more research on the subject than any of the clowns who voted for cap and tax.
Post a Comment