Friday Funny

Every once in awhile something comes along that lets you know you made a difference while generating a laugh at the same time.

SteveHunter_thermometers

Cartoon Credit: Steve Hunter http://www.stevehunterillustrations.com.au/

h/t to Viv Forbes of the Carbon Sense Coalition

Advertisements

42 thoughts on “Friday Funny

  1. The truth is that satellites CAN NOT measure land temperatures. It has been tried – it does not work!

  2. Got a good laugh out of that one especially when I saw the IPCC and the CSIRO on those brief cases.
    Anthony, It is a damn good feeling sometimes when you know from deep down inside you that you have made a difference, a real difference to the world. and not many can claim that.
    In your case along with a very few others who took on the nascent global green dictatorship with their massive resources of every type backing them, you along with the other skeptic bloggers Steve McIntyre amongst them, have made that difference in the forcing back the tide of a possible future global green dictatorship.
    Your’s and your contemporary’s effectiveness and success is global in extent and has perhaps done more than any other tiny group on this planet to begin the rolling back of what one day will be seen as a mass collective madness almost beyond comprehension to those who will follow after our generations.
    Feel good about yourself, You deserve it in every way.

  3. “The truth is that satellites CAN NOT measure land temperatures. It has been tried – it does not work!”

    They can, if You mean the ground surface. What they can’t do is to measure the air temperature just above the ground (except in the Arctic apparently, if we are to believe believe the “pause-killers”).

  4. Robert Clemenzi says: November 15, 2013 at 1:22 am
    The truth is that satellites CAN NOT measure land temperatures. It has been tried – it does not work!
    ____________________________________

    They can, but they need calibration. Thats where the land stations come into the picture – and the warmer the calibration stations on land, the warmer the rest of the world looks to the satellite.

    R

  5. Good try, but a major fault in the drawing, The incinerator should clearly have been an outside grill or a simple burn barrel.

  6. It is generally agreed that the global surface-to-lower troposhere amplification factor (as derived from the laspe rate enhancement) is, or should be, approximately 1.2. So, if the satellites have now suddenly become super-accurate and reliable, let’s go the whole hog and use them to estimate the global surface temperature trend. By ratioing the current RSS decadal trend of .127C down by 1.2, the new and improved GISS’ decadal trend (since 1979) would come in around .106C instead of its current obviously incorrect rate of .159C. Better than we thought! This method has the additional benefit of saving a lot of money, since we no longer require either the GISS and HADCRUTx temperature series, nor the expensive and sophisticated efforts of the TOBS adjusters and the UHI non-adjusters.

  7. Robert

    Land base stations sample about 2% of the Earth’s surface. Satellites sample over 80%. We’re looking for trends in average air temps, not absolute values. Two reasons: 1) we are only interested in finding the rate (if any) warming or cooling & 2) the AGW crowd doesn’t want the public thinking about absolute temps. God forbid the general public should consider that people actually like to move south to warmer climes.

    Satellites aren’t absolutely accurate but they are far more indicative of changes and trends than surface stations, especially with the trend toward airport based land stations and the drastic drop in rural stations after 1989.

    Finally, you obviously have no sense of humor and have swallowed too much of the AGW pablum.

    Bill

  8. @ Peter Miller “On a more serious note, the cartoon comment reflects the reason why GISS has made most of its largest temperature adjustments/manipulations/torturing in the pre-satellite area.”

    More pragmatically, if you lie about the current temperatures, more people will notice. If you lie about temperature half a century ago, how many people will realize?

    For anyone concerned, pardon my usage of the word “lie” instead of euphemisms such as “adjust” or “recalibrate”. I think we went past the “adjust” phase some years back.

  9. chris y says:
    November 15, 2013 at 4:46 am

    > How do these compare with those of cartoonist John Cook?

    Cook’s cartoons seem to predate him becoming a climate change evangelist. The only thing he seems to have done since then is SkS’s banner image with the penguins looking at a green plant emerging from antarctic ice. I’ve sometimes wondered why he’s dropped his art, possibilities range from lack of time, general bitterness, fear of being compared to Josh, and maybe someone else drew them.

  10. A few years ago here in Newcastle upon Tyne, we had the distinction of having the highest levels of airborne pollution in Europe, because the city council in their wisdom installed the pollution sensors in the underground Bus Concourse!
    You really couldn’t make it up!

  11. Lately here in the UK, our tv weather presenters have been at pains to point out: ‘That’s the temperature in the towns and cities, in rural areas it will be two or three degrees (Celcius) cooler..’
    Because of the URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT…

  12. The Sun beating down on the perfectly angled brick building is the best part. Should keep that sensor toasty all night long.

  13. Funny but Kevin Cowtan and Robert Way were just able to employ satellites in a “study” that ends up with even better, more positive warming trends than those from the airports themselves! ;-) Never underestimate the alarmists’ creativity in fabricating evidence.

  14. Anthony,

    Get in touch with Mary K. Hamm of http://www.hotair.com news/blog and work with her on a post/story/news item on Obama’s new lie / power grab of the EPA/CO2 climate change fraud.

    Reason being his lie based health care .con is wrecking the U.S. health care system. Now he goes for the full monte of the entire operation via the EPA wrecking the base industries that keeps the worlds and U.S.A.’s food and energy going.

    Plus she seems to be a very nice and smart lady.

  15. I have a temperature gauge in my truck. As I drive across the USA I find that almost all the temperature displays on the side of the road deviate from my own temperature gauge by +/- 2, 3 some even 4 degrees.

    I find it hard to believe that they have accurate temperature information. How often do they check or calibrate their equipment? Is there a temperature equivalent of the atomic clock. Super precise, accurate and stable over long periods of time?

    I mean, if a few degrees make such a huge difference in the climate of the earth, wouldn’t ½° temperature change cause undeniable and self-evident climate change?

    Wouldn’t even one tenth of a degree change cause some severe weather?

    If my car engine melts jus two degrees above normal operating temperature, a ½ degree change in temperature would mean a pretty hot engine!

  16. There once was a climate scientist from Nantucket
    Who carried this data to work in a bucket
    Though his models showed warming
    he was caught misinforming
    and was last seen wearing a straightjacket.

  17. The thing is, if they actually did change tack and rely on satellites to measure temperature, we’d discover that the satellites were redirected to orbit the sun.

  18. Great cartoon and worth framing. The Australian CSIRO that has produced great inventions (e.g. Wi-Fi) has become a laughing stock when it comes to climate change and sea level rise. Someone really needs to pull the CSIRO climate dingbats back into line.

  19. @ Gail Combs – THANKS FOR SHARING. Yes, super funny (esp. #2). “… Talk about an inconvenient truth.” lol
    ***********************************

    Dear Philip Finck,

    Some Possible Sources for You:

    1. http://www.hurricanescience.org/history/storms/pre1900s/1780/
    2. http://worldhistoryproject.org/1780/10/10/great-hurricane-of-1780

    WUWT Threads (be sure to look in the Comments, too):

    1. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/05/did-global-warming-reduce-the-impacts-of-sandy/

    2. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/17/if-storms-are-worse-now-why-did-they-need-a-sea-wall-150-years-ago/

    3. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/30/ipcc-sea-level-exaggeration/

    4. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/29/the-great-labor-day-hurricane-of-1935/
    (See comment at 4:13pm 8/29/13)

    5. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/19/from-the-scientific-urban-legend-department-agw-sea-level-rise-made-sandy-more-destructive/

    Was that helpful? If you can find anything in the above that helps you successfully counter the economy-damaging AGW l1es, the time I spent looking for these cites will have been worth it.

    Your American ally for truth and freedom,

    Janice

  20. You go Janice!!! After reading your cites I feel sure they will help Mr. Finck. I enjoyed them because they expanded my knowledge.

  21. Philip Finck says:
    November 15, 2013 at 3:43 am

    This is off topic but I’m asking for help in finding a story that I believe was on this site some time ago. …

    I want to mention historic extreme hurricane events with respect to damages that would occur now vs what happened several hundred years ago. There was a story about a hurricane in the Caribbean in the 1700′s (?) …… talked about the governors stone mansion being destroyed, cannons being blown off the walls of the fort, thousands of lives lost.

    I don’t remember the post off hand, but I found the account you want to use, see http://www.thebermudian.com/past-issues/143 which says in part:

    At Government House every precaution was taken to guard against what might happen: the doors and windows were barricaded, but it availed little.

    By 10 p.m. the wind forced itself a passage through the house from the north-north-west; and the tempest increasing every minute, the family took to the centre of the building, imagining from the prodigious strength of the walls, they being three feet thick, and from its circular form, it would have withstood the wind’s utmost rage. However, by half past eleven they were obliged to retreat to the cellar, the wind having forced its passage into every part, and tore off most of the roof.

    From this asylum they were soon driven out; the water, being stopped in its passage, having found itself a course to the cellar, they knew not where to go. The water had rose four feet, and the ruins were falling from all quarters.

    To continue in the cellar was impossible; to return to the house equally so. The only chance left was making for the fields, which at that time appeared equally dangerous. It was, however, attempted; and the family got to the ruins of the foundation of the flagstaff, which soon after giving way, every one endeavoured to find a retreat for himself. The Governor and the few that remained were thrown down; and it was with great difficulty they gained the cannon, under the carriage of which they took shelter. Their situation here was deplorable: many of the cannon were moved; and they had reason to fear that the one under which they sat might be dismounted and crush them by its fall, or that some of the ruins which were flying about might put an end to their existence; and, to render the scene still more doubtful, they were near the powder-magazine. The armoury was levelled to the ground, and the arms scattered about.

    Wikipedia offers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hurricane_of_1780
    A more general look at that year is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1780_Atlantic_hurricane_season :

    The 1780 Atlantic hurricane season ran through the summer and fall in 1780. The 1780 season was extraordinarily destructive, and was the deadliest Atlantic hurricane season in recorded history with over 28,000 deaths. Four different hurricanes, one in June and three in October, caused at least 1,000 deaths each;[1][2] this event has never been repeated and only in the 1893 and 2005 seasons were there two such hurricanes.[3] The season also had the deadliest Atlantic hurricane of all time, since known as the Great Hurricane of 1780.

  22. @ Stan Stendera — Thanks! Hope all is well in the studio and with your little birds on the railing and with dear Libby. I wish you posted more often. Your shining star personality brightens this place up. We NEED that around here!

    Boy, after Hawkins and Werme and I went to all that effort….. IF MR. FINCK DOES NOT REPORT BACK HERE, HE WILL BE A FINK. (grrr)

  23. Robert Clemenzi says November 15, 2013 at 1:22 am

    The truth is that satellites CAN NOT measure land temperatures. It has been tried – it does not work!

    Nor do the “land temperatures”. They are supposed to measure air temps at around 4 foot off the ground. To measure the ground temp, you need to put a thermometer in the ground.

    Satellites measure air temps in different layers, one being closest to the ground.

  24. Robert of Ottawa says:

    Satellites measure air temps in different layers, one being closest to the ground.

    The idea that satellites can determine the temperature of different layers is an area of recent research, but the results are very speculative and, so far, of little use.

    Satellites measure radiation. Various algorithms are used to determine the temperature that produces that radiation. Because IR radiation does not penetrate clouds, microwave radiation is used to determine the *surface* temperature. If you assume that the atmosphere is opaque, the rest of the spectra can be used to determine the radiation temperature of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The problem is that because the upper atmosphere is not opaque, there is no way to determine how thick the emission layer is or how much radiation, if any, is coming from the surface. As a result, there are multiple possible scenarios that will give the same spectra. Also, once a specific temperature profile is selected, there is no way to determine how high above the surface a specific temperature occurs.

    In addition, because the 4-foot air temperature is frequently colder than the air a few hundred meters above it, there is no way to determine what it might be.

    Over the oceans, satellites are capable of determining the temperature of the upper 2 millimeters of water. Research indicates that this is a good approximation of the atmosphere temperature 4 feet above the surface. However, over land, ground based thermometers have shown that the *surface* temperature is +60F to -20F of what is measured in a Stevenson screen, perhaps more.

    There are additional problems with satellites – orbital drift, a lack of needed detectors, a lack of adequate calibration, and so forth.

    In my opinion, the only temperature that “might” apply to climate is one from 6″ to 1′ below the surface. I like this because all peaks are integrated out. Transient phenomena, like air conditioners and jet airplanes, will have no effect.

Comments are closed.