Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

‘Global Temperature’ — Why Should We Trust A Statistic That Might Not Even Exist?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ‘Global Temperature’ — Why Should We Trust A Statistic That Might Not Even Exist?

    ‘Global Temperature’ — Why Should We Trust A Statistic That Might Not Even Exist?

    The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is quite certain Earth will be in trouble if the global temperature exceeds pre-industrial levels by 1.5 degrees Celsius or more. But how can anyone know? According to university research, “global temperature” is a meaningless concept.

    “Discussions on global warming often refer to ‘global temperature.’ Yet the concept is thermodynamically as well as mathematically an impossibility,” says Science Daily, paraphrasing Bjarne Andresen, a professor at the University of Copenhagen’s Niels Bohr Institute, one of three authors of a paper questioning the “validity of a ‘global temperature.'”

    Science Daily explains how the “global temperature” is determined.

    “The temperature obtained by collecting measurements of air temperatures at a large number of measuring stations around the globe, weighing them according to the area they represent, and then calculating the yearly average according to the usual method of adding all values and dividing by the number of points.”

    But a “temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system,” says Andresen. The climate is not regulated by a single temperature. Instead, “differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate”.

    While it’s “possible to treat temperature statistically locally,” says Science Daily, “it is meaningless to talk about a global temperature for Earth. The globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book. That is meaningless.”

    There are two ways to measure temperature: geometrically and mathematically. They can produce a large enough difference to show a four-degree gap, which is sufficient to drive “all the thermodynamic processes which create storms, thunder, sea currents, etc.,” according to Science Daily.

    So if global temperature is unknowable, how can the IPCC and the entire industry of alarmists and activists be so sure there exists a threshold we cannot pass? Of course the IPCC says it knows the unknowable. In its latest report, released this month, it yet again maintained that the global temperature must “kept to well below 2ºC, if not 1.5oC” above pre-industrial levels to avoid disaster.

    A few years after the University of Copenhagen report was published, University of Guelph economist Ross McKitrick, one of the report’s authors, noted in another paper that “number of weather stations providing data . . . plunged in 1990 and again in 2005. The sample size has fallen by over 75% from its peak in the early 1970s, and is now smaller than at any time since 1919.”

    “There are serious quality problems in the surface temperature data sets that call into question whether the global temperature history, especially over land, can be considered both continuous and precise. Users should be aware of these limitations, especially in policy-sensitive applications.”

    The global warming alarmists, who have seized and now control the narrative — because, like a child who won’t stop crying for a toy he can’t have, they refuse give up — have a credibility problem. Actually, they have several. The public will eventually forget about them all, though, just as it has overlooked the mistakes by those who predicted other catastrophes that never arrived, such as Y2K, the new Ice Age, acid rain, mass human starvation, overpopulation, peak oil, and the Silent Spring.

    After all, humans have been watching Doomsday prophets fail throughout history. They’ve been so common we hardly notice them.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  • #2
    Wow!
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #3
      There's also the fact that there are no temperature monitoring stations throughout many of the coldest parts of the earth largely because those areas of the earth are not easily accessible or hospitable. This significant gap in the data naturally leads to a higher "average".
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • #4
        Ya know, I had a thought....

        Here on Tweb, the climate alarmists seem to be people who are pretty much at odds with so many other aspects of discussion on Tweb.

        On the other hand, the skeptics include some really good solid logical intelligent people like Sparko.... um, wait, bad example.... ROGUE!!!.... ok, maybe not so much... um.... somebody calm and stable and always reasonable like MM!!!!.... ok, maybe not such a great example. Um..... There's ME!!!... ok, not quite as bad as Rogue, but close...

        I think this theory needs more work.

        I'll get back to ya later.


        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Ya know, I had a thought....
          And thus fullfilling your quota for the month.

          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Here on Tweb, the climate alarmists seem to be people who are pretty much at odds with so many other aspects of discussion on Tweb.

          On the other hand, the skeptics include some really good solid logical intelligent people like Sparko.... um, wait, bad example.... ROGUE!!!.... ok, maybe not so much... um.... somebody calm and stable and always reasonable like MM!!!!.... ok, maybe not such a great example. Um..... There's ME!!!... ok, not quite as bad as Rogue, but close...

          I think this theory needs more work.

          I'll get back to ya later.


          smiley dejected.gif



          And I consider myself to be pretty much on the fence about this. I tend to be somewhat skeptical of what both sides claim.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

            Here on Tweb, the climate alarmists seem to be people who are pretty much at odds with so many other aspects of discussion on Tweb.
            And then there is this (which was where I thought you were headed):


            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              ‘Global Temperature’ — Why Should We Trust A Statistic That Might Not Even Exist?

              The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is quite certain Earth will be in trouble if the global temperature exceeds pre-industrial levels by 1.5 degrees Celsius or more. But how can anyone know? According to university research, “global temperature” is a meaningless concept.

              “Discussions on global warming often refer to ‘global temperature.’ Yet the concept is thermodynamically as well as mathematically an impossibility,” says Science Daily, paraphrasing Bjarne Andresen, a professor at the University of Copenhagen’s Niels Bohr Institute, one of three authors of a paper questioning the “validity of a ‘global temperature.'”

              Science Daily explains how the “global temperature” is determined.

              “The temperature obtained by collecting measurements of air temperatures at a large number of measuring stations around the globe, weighing them according to the area they represent, and then calculating the yearly average according to the usual method of adding all values and dividing by the number of points.”

              But a “temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system,” says Andresen. The climate is not regulated by a single temperature. Instead, “differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate”.

              While it’s “possible to treat temperature statistically locally,” says Science Daily, “it is meaningless to talk about a global temperature for Earth. The globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book. That is meaningless.”

              There are two ways to measure temperature: geometrically and mathematically. They can produce a large enough difference to show a four-degree gap, which is sufficient to drive “all the thermodynamic processes which create storms, thunder, sea currents, etc.,” according to Science Daily.

              So if global temperature is unknowable, how can the IPCC and the entire industry of alarmists and activists be so sure there exists a threshold we cannot pass? Of course the IPCC says it knows the unknowable. In its latest report, released this month, it yet again maintained that the global temperature must “kept to well below 2ºC, if not 1.5oC” above pre-industrial levels to avoid disaster.

              A few years after the University of Copenhagen report was published, University of Guelph economist Ross McKitrick, one of the report’s authors, noted in another paper that “number of weather stations providing data . . . plunged in 1990 and again in 2005. The sample size has fallen by over 75% from its peak in the early 1970s, and is now smaller than at any time since 1919.”

              “There are serious quality problems in the surface temperature data sets that call into question whether the global temperature history, especially over land, can be considered both continuous and precise. Users should be aware of these limitations, especially in policy-sensitive applications.”

              The global warming alarmists, who have seized and now control the narrative — because, like a child who won’t stop crying for a toy he can’t have, they refuse give up — have a credibility problem. Actually, they have several. The public will eventually forget about them all, though, just as it has overlooked the mistakes by those who predicted other catastrophes that never arrived, such as Y2K, the new Ice Age, acid rain, mass human starvation, overpopulation, peak oil, and the Silent Spring.

              After all, humans have been watching Doomsday prophets fail throughout history. They’ve been so common we hardly notice them.
              Fails the smell test. Or would you say that the average surface temperature on Venus being around 900 degrees Fahrenheit is 'meaningless' relative to the average temperature of the Earth? Or that the average surface temperature of Mars being -81 F is 'meaningless' relative to the Earth?

              No, the average surface temperature does have meaning, especially when the same measurement taken over time shows a clear and unrelenting increase. The issue here is does it represent same sort of thing as taking the temperature of you food while it is cooking. No, it does not have that sort of meaning. But it does tell us if over time the average air land and sea temperatures are increasing, staying the same, or decreasing.

              Jim
              Last edited by oxmixmudd; 08-26-2019, 10:21 AM.
              He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

              "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                ...somebody calm and stable and always reasonable like MM!!!!.... ok, maybe not such a great example.
                Hey!!! I'm always CALM AND REASONABLE, you pea brained, dunce cap wearing IGNORAMUS!!!!!
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  ...the same measurement taken over time shows a clear and unrelenting increase.
                  Except it's not the same measurement. There are far fewer temperature stations now than in years past, many of those stations are no longer optimally placed due to urban expansion, huge swaths of the earth have no temperature stations (notably many of the earth's coldest regions), and the data, including the historic record, has been "adjusted" so many times that it is now thoroughly corrupted and untrustworthy.
                  Last edited by Mountain Man; 08-26-2019, 10:29 AM.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    Hey!!! I'm always CALM AND REASONABLE, you pea brained, dunce cap wearing IGNORAMUS!!!!!
                    I can see that!
                    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      And thus fullfilling your quota for the month.
                      Actually, I had one last week, too, but next week starts a whole 'nuther month!
                      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        And I consider myself to be pretty much on the fence about this. I tend to be somewhat skeptical of what both sides claim.
                        Same here. That gets us the "climate denier" label, however.
                        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                        sigpic
                        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          Actually, I had one last week, too, but next week starts a whole 'nuther month!
                          Did it hurt?
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                            Did it hurt?
                            Laughing.... when I have a GOOD idea (come on, it happens) I always say "It HURTS to be this smart".
                            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              $cirisme and Dee Dee both said I was right once.

                              Proud Member of Da Blonde's Axis of Evil, Adam's Dirty Dozen, Dee Dee's Goon Squad, Tweb's In-Crowd, The Brood of Vipers & Exorcised by Ty & Dee Dee, and the only person who ever banned rogue06!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X