Comments on: How not to measure temperature, part 22

By: woody

woody — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:50:00 +0000

She would make a great scientist except every scientist that questions the CFR/Bilderberg created global warming fraud gets tossed from their universities or lose their funding. Only global warming sycophants get continued funding.

By: Vierotchka

Vierotchka — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:40:26 +0000

Nice little exercises at moving the deck-chairs around on the Titanic.

By: David Walton

David Walton — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:12:23 +0000

Thumbs up to Kristen Byrnes, she has a better grasp of climate science and debate than most adults.

I believe she will make an excellent professional scientist in any field if she decides that is what she wants to do.

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:57:41 +0000

I think it has do do with ratios. UHI’s (which ARE part of the warming) are increasing over X percent of the total land surface.

However the UHI effect (and the bad individual siting problems too) are probbly overtaking the heating stations at a much higher percentage rate.

This stands to (superficial) reason, because many stations are initially placed on the outskirts of what later becomes a UHI.

By: Lon

Lon — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:55:06 +0000

Wait, I thought global warming was supposed to be caused by an increased number of people stuff?

Now I’m totally confused.

Lon

By: Luke Burgess

Luke Burgess — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:34:31 +0000

There are a lot more heat producing devices other than AC units, that can be found in urban locations.
Cars, Computers, streetlights, and even people, our own physical systems produce heat.
People are also inventing new ways to make heat every day, the best way is with an I-phone.
Let’s say there is a city with measuring devices on the outer edges over time the city grows and if the city makes a heat island than that island can grow to the point of heating up the measuring devices around it.
But, that would cause a sudden spike up not a slow climb like the ones seen in the graphs.
So the question is if the growth in economy of a city can cause a gradual temperature climb of the overall heat island.
Then, the slow climb would be from global warming not the stuff people use in the city.

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:10:36 +0000

I am following all this with great interest. It seems there are a lot of poor sites. So, what’s are the totals, so far? How many are in compliance and how many are out? Of those which are out, how many are seriously out?

It would seem possible to pick it all apart, except I don’t know if you’ve included all the findings you and your volunteers have acquired.

But since you have already released partial findings, would it bias the study to keep a running track?

(Oooooh, and the findings, too! What are the aggreagate plusses and minuses of the siting categories?)

Besides, I’d be interested if the initial ratio underwent one of them there “paradigm shifts” once your effort spreads and multiplies.

Would it be immoral to predict that before long you’ve going to be seeing fewer “incidental” mobile non-compliances such as the BBQ and trash barrels?

I am a liberal, and still an agnostic on the reality/source of GW. (This may change.) Sure, the panicmongers have been wrong the last ten times, but they only have to be right once.

But one thing’s for sure, GW theory is based on raw data. And I suspect those who are averse to data review. (Or release of method.)