It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The GIG is up on the IPCC and the tweaked NASA data

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff

I just don't see how so little can have such a huge effect on the rest of the total atmosphere.
That is what is known as an argument from ignorance. It is a classic logical fallacy.


By now, according to all bore, the north west passage should be ice free, why is it not so?
Citation, please?


Why is global sea ice at its highest since 1988?
It isn't. The extent of Antarctic sea ice has increased due to changing weather patterns. Arctic sea ice, which is more sensitive to temperature changes, has shown a steady decline. The Antarctic is far colder than the Arctic because it is a continental mass. Even if the temperature rose 5º in the Antarctic, ice would still form.
nsidc.org...



edit on 2/10/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/10/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/10/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Sunwolf

That is what I want to know,if the thermometer is off replace it or disregard the data.
That leaves you with very little data. It's not as if the adjustments which are made are random or arbitrary. They are checked against reliable stations, stations which are located in rural environments. The data from newly replaced instruments is compared with older data.

bad data is absolutely useless. So say the most famous Physicists we have ever known. You darn well know it. You have failed bad on this over an over Phage. I am surprised at how easy you are to allow bad data. Crap man wake up and get on board. People like you make little people, to weak to challenge you, shy away from the truth. Is that your plan?
edit on 10-2-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman




bad data is absolutely useless.

That would depend upon if the "badness" is random or contains known biases.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   


You know that statistical analysis is an integral part of the scientific method, right?



And what is that supposed to mean?

Statistics are based on data, if the data is incorrect the statistics are meaningless.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: PeterMcFly
a reply to: Sunwolf



Why not use the actual temp instead of a flawed instrument and try to adjust data at all?


In my book, if the sensor is well calibrated, the unadulterated data is "king". If the sensor is not situated well, it mean a lack of homogeneity among sensor in the network, that is called "lame work", data from this station shall be discarted!




yep all day long.

AND my livelihood depends on properly calibrating the instruments and now a know it all scientist dares to act like that is NOT the case. WTH? Phage you are exposed.. sorry man. I like your comments more than I don't but not on this subject. Now i am going to question your reasoning in all science matters going forward. tsk tsk



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: kennyb72




Statistics are based on data, if the data is incorrect the statistics are meaningless.


No. Statistics are used to determine if the data is useable. If the SNR is too high to make the data useless.
All instruments are subject to error. Statistical analysis determines the level of error. Statistical analysis allows trends to be discerned.
edit on 2/10/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: kennyb72



You know that statistical analysis is an integral part of the scientific method, right?



And what is that supposed to mean?

Statistics are based on data, if the data is incorrect the statistics are meaningless.


This is so obvious to the scientist that are my peers. I know that information is exactly how i have been able to make them understand the underpinnings on this debate. The shills keeping attempting to skirt the logic and the data and any legitimate Physicist who are on record disputing the lie.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman



The shills keeping attempting

Ah. There is it! The ad hominem. Another classic logical fallacy.
Please see my sig.

edit on 2/10/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Justoneman



The shills keeping attempting

Ah. There is it! The ad hominem. Another classic logical fallacy.
Please see my sig.

are you being a shill for bad data or not ? You either are being, on purpose, a supporter of proven bad data or not. You refuse to hear the testimony . What is there to consider when one continually ignores the opportunity to hear the source of the data sets and are clearly willing to accept that faulty equipment needed tweaking to be legit?
edit on 10-2-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:41 AM
link   
This could be a good thread if there were less arguments from authority and ad hominems.

Hell there are a lot more logical fallacies being used in this thread but it seems like those two that I listed show up in every other post.

Just my 2 cents...meh.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: kennyb72




Statistics are based on data, if the data is incorrect the statistics are meaningless.


No. Statistics are used to determine if the data is useable. If the SNR is too high to make the data useless.
All instruments are subject to error. Statistical analysis determines the level of error.


Yeah, as humans we have only just gotten this temperature data thing down. It's no wonder all three of Peru's thermometers were reading low. They have money in the budget for a new one next year, that should be less tempermental. It will be a few years before they figure how to use it, but that's ok, we have an algorithm that knows what the temperature of Peru is at any given time, so we can use that in the meantime. It should help a lot with training and calibration too!



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Yes you are spot on, i dont need any ad hominems. Sorry, if it was taking that way . At this point i am asking Phage to evaluate if he is or is not.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




No. Statistics are used to determine if the data is usual. If the SNR is too high to make the data useless.
All instruments are subject to error. Statistical analysis determines the level of error.


If the SNR is too high to get a correct reading,it means that the data IS useless and no amount of fudging will ever provide accurate figures. What it does do though,is to provide a layer of opacity that hides the true audit trail making verification impossible.



edit on 10-2-2015 by kennyb72 because: Emphasis



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   
and i remind you all about this from the OP

ttp://www.local8now.com/home/headlines/Cross-country-car-trip-used-only-solar-hydrogen-198746181.html

this car will solve our problems and crickets on it from phage. It is easy to connect the dots at this point as to why they use bad data for policy decisions that affect Billions of people financially on this planet in a negative way for the benefit of a very few oligarchs.
edit on 10-2-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Modern civilization is dependent on fossil fuels, are you suggesting that it is time for modern civilization to go?

I would be very interested to hear your plan to destroy civilization.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Well now I have to go to bed so I can go to work tomorrow/today. Phage will not admit that bad sensor data is bad to use. He won't ever be able to defend such an unscientific position. I can't really believe the one who knows so much about space exploration, and how the devices in space we use to collect data work, would EVER in a million years say data collected all over the earth with tech we have had for years with improvements of data collection to the 10th of a degree C has to be massaged because the equipment sucks so bad. While on other threads he is quoted as saying the OP is wrong because the device has a flaw and you must ignore what your own eyes see???? My guess is he is done with this thread and probably any more like them as he has to be smart enough to know that he has very flawed logic and I will challenge his logic on every thread i see like this while he insists on remaining either willfully ignorant or worse and stay so stubborn.
edit on 10-2-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 08:12 AM
link   
In the year 2015, with a subject as important as Climate Change, if we cannot get verifiable data with ambient temperature readings, then we have complete idiots where scientists should be.

You have a temperature probe. It's not an expensive thing. Then you question the accuracy of said probe. So you install a secondary probe of a different type to verify. If you find a discrepancy, you REPLACE the malfunctioning probe and disregard the data.

It's almost as if the malfunctions are needed to justify the manipulation.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: kennyb72



What it does do though,is to provide a layer of opacity that hides the true audit trail making verification impossible.


That would be true if the raw data weren't easily available.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: Kali74

Modern civilization is dependent on fossil fuels, are you suggesting that it is time for modern civilization to go?

I would be very interested to hear your plan to destroy civilization.


...

Civilization and economies were once dependent on slavery and slave trade also. Switching to alternatives didn't cause any collapse.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




What an amazingly dickhead tone to take.

Do you have any genuine clue as to whether or not this person HAD read the documentation?

Disagree.....great....provide a reason why and back it up........ but discredit? Personally attack based off of ones intellect and diligence? Immediately go for the jugular?



I'm really trying to be civil, even though I used the term "dickhead". Please think about your approach.
edit on 10-2-2015 by nullafides because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join