https://api.nasa.gov/
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4
The hockey stick graph is a proven fraud. So now you resorted to straight up known lies?
Post 648
1 wherever climate scientists get their raw data. Why does that matter?
1-11 range from repeating the other points to irrelevant, elitist nonsense
|
A) I'm aware that there's been controversy surrounding the 'hockey-stick', however I'm not aware that it's been proven to be a fraud. A citation would be helpful.
B) Fraud is an extremely serious thing within the scientific community. Since things are examined by a number of independent teams, there would be zero profit in any attempt at deception.
C) You're characterization of my behavior could land you in court. Watch your mouth.
1) I've never seen where a scientist shares raw data with the public. It's only after analysis that anything is published. JPL gets streams of zeros and ones, which must be processed into useable information, using multi-variate statistical analysis, solving simultaneously for half a dozen unknowns which must all 'fit' some model within some prescribed tolerance. I'm certain that the data is available to qualified researchers. What's done with it would be a conversation.
1-11) I'll have to leave this thread an read the source material elsewhere, as you've cut me off from it.
I looked at # 648 ( permalink )
I refuse to look at it. I don't recognize it as a reputable source for information.
Either you know things or you don't. If you can't tell us directly about something without referring to someone else, I've zero confidence that YOU have any command of the information whatsoever.
This is how it's going to work.
Here's some 'data'