The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[freebeard]

Hey, I use dateandtime.com for their 5-day forecast.

There's probably a page under Free Fun that lets people make any countdown timer they wish.

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Please take notice who is citing legitimate sources - and who is citing debunked and laughably biased bloggers and political opinions.

Who is citing all the data and the certain scientific conclusions - and who is asserting a conspiracy theory.

I'm not good at self-assessment. Do I fall into either of those two categories?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPzeu96QJ6w

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Hey, I use dateandtime.com for their 5-day forecast.

There's probably a page under Free Fun that lets people make any countdown timer they wish.

Yup. I edited the URL, which worked, then I stumbled upon the hamburger menu in the upper left corner. Or the bottom link. Or the Timers tab. I forgot

[redpoint5]

I don't know who that person is. Probably reflects my utter disinterest in seeking popular news. Climate change denyer? Green evangelist?

[freebeard]

Who? Black Pigeon Speaks?

Apologies if you meant someone else. but BPS is a Canadian ex-pat living in Toykp who takes injured pigeons home and nurses them back to health. Kinda like N. Tesla.

Since you can't watch it because it might be popular news, it's not about climate at all, but about the plastic in our feces and the overpopulation of Africa and how cattle will be the death of us all. 60% of the mammals are gone already.

Like it says on the tin, black pill. Not popular.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

LOL "Bartfart" as a legit source of facts.

Legitimacy destroyed. Shame.

You just see its Bret and ignore thata it's a university of Australia study.
Not like any left leaning news out lest is going to expose beliver mistakes.

[redpoint5]

I was saying I don't know the person in the countdown timer, but I also don't know who BPS is. You'd be surprised how much I don't know. :P

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

You just see its Bret and ignore thata it's a university of Australia study.
Not like any left leaning news out lest is going to expose beliver mistakes.

The problem is not (only) Breitbart's filtering; Breitibartfast often seems to report about a fictitious planet of their own creation. But HadCRUT4 data exists and so does John McLean.
The problem is that it isn't news.

I finally got around to searching for HadCRUT4 and lo and behold, the whole analysis and debunking has been done months ago. There's a problem with HadCRUT4 data - but it isn't deliberate skewing of data (either way).

A detailed study here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/...hadcrut4-data/

HadCRUT4 global temperature anomalies were assessed to determine the impact of varying data coverage and noise as described by McLean. It is recognized that sparser data coverage and increased noise have influenced interannual HadCRUT4 temperature anomalies pre-1950.

Interannual temperature spikes, both warm and cold, increase in frequency during the Questionable Data timeframe pre-1950. While several of these spikes may be associated with El Nino and La Nina events, others may be the result of increased noise within the data. This period of questionable data, especially the cluster of warm and cold spikes from 1880 to 1920, warrants further study.

The 1878 warm temperature spike is the most significant interannual temperature anomaly over the past 160 years. The temperature amplitude is almost double in magnitude over all other temperature amplitude spikes. This recorded temperature outlier is most likely erroneously high due to sparse global coverage and increased data noise.

Warm and cold spike maximums do not demonstrate any obvious increasing or decreasing trends from 1880 to present day, except for 1878. The recent 1998 and 2016 warm spikes are within one standard deviation of past warm spikes.

The HadCRUT4 global data pre-1950 may contain useful information but should be used with caution with an understanding that increases in noise due to poor data sampling may create false or enhanced temperature anomalies.

So the data is less reliable pre 1950 (a well known fact).
It also is particularly unreliable around the 1880s, continuing up to the 1920.
Why does that not surprise me...

Oh, but John McLean is a professor, no?
https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/01/13...inked-fairfax/

On his website McLean describes himself as a "computer consultant and occasional travel photographer" ... [with] no verifiable scientific qualifications

Bye bye mr Australian pie...

[oil pan 4]

Good luck selling global warming when the highs have been below 0F in half the country for a week to people who already refuse to pay for it.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Good luck selling global warming when the highs have been below 0F in half the country for a week to people who already refuse to pay for it.

Sour grapes. That post got debunked, but you won't admit.

John McLean is a nobody, but he got the academic world investigating the data again and of course the conclusion was what we knew all along. Time wasted - a battle of attrition to waste energy from the scientific community.

You know damn well that the cold in the US right now is the result of an anomaly in the weather pattern. That cold isn't where it should be, protecting the polar ice. We've been there before already.
Why do you keep repeating?
Is your argument that while YOU know the climate is changing due to human activities, the average American does not get it or care enough about it?

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

You just see its Bret and ignore thata it's a university of Australia study.
Not like any left leaning news out lest is going to expose beliver mistakes.

Yes, I am comfortable in not giving anything on Bartfart any serious consideration. Sudoku is a better waste of time. I also don't pee into the wind, or stick my tongue on metal in sub-freezing temps.