Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Need Help from Global Warming Pundits
Wednesday, March 7, 2007 9:22 PM
CANTTAKESKY
Wednesday, March 7, 2007 10:09 PM
OLDENGLANDDRY
Wednesday, March 7, 2007 11:05 PM
KHYRON
Thursday, March 8, 2007 2:45 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Thursday, March 8, 2007 3:54 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Khyron: This is what I came up with, it has normalised temperature scales, so a bit of indirect info on the standard deviation
Quote:Also, a lot of temperature measurements are done using satellites (and I guess ground stations are then used to calibrate the data).
Quote:This is particulary useful when measuring ocean temperatures and has been done since about 1980, so that's a fairly large window where temperatures have been measured literally globally.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007 10:47 AM
Thursday, April 5, 2007 1:19 PM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Thursday, April 5, 2007 2:33 PM
RUE
I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!
Thursday, April 5, 2007 3:36 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: You just gotta read the ICC report to answer these questions. It's all there. Get back to us when your done, ok?
Thursday, April 5, 2007 3:38 PM
Sunday, April 8, 2007 4:57 AM
Quote:You just gotta read the ICC report to answer these questions. It's all there. Get back to us when your done, ok?
Sunday, April 8, 2007 2:35 PM
FIVVER
Quote: In this, the first of a series, I examine The Deniers, starting with Edward Wegman. Dr. Wegman is a professor at the Center for Computational Statistics at George Mason University, chair of the National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, and board member of the American Statistical Association. Few statisticians in the world have CVs to rival his (excerpts appear nearby). ----------------------------- While Wegman's advice -- to use trained statisticians in studies reliant on statistics -- may seem too obvious to need stating, the "science is settled" camp resists it. Mann's hockey-stick graph may be wrong, many experts now acknowledge, but they assert that he nevertheless came to the right conclusion. To which Wegman, and doubtless others who want more rigourous science, shake their heads in disbelief. As Wegman summed it up to the energy and commerce committee in later testimony: "I am baffled by the claim that the incorrect method doesn't matter because the answer is correct anyway. Method Wrong + Answer Correct = Bad Science." With bad science, only true believers can assert that they nevertheless obtained the right answer.
Monday, April 9, 2007 7:00 AM
KANEMAN
Monday, April 9, 2007 7:07 AM
Monday, April 9, 2007 7:19 AM
Monday, April 9, 2007 7:24 AM
Monday, April 9, 2007 7:31 AM
Quote:Originally posted by canttakesky: Quote:You just gotta read the ICC report to answer these questions. It's all there. Get back to us when your done, ok?Hostilities aside, this is a genuine request for help. I looked in the ICC reports. I couldn't find it. Maybe I'm just an stupid ignorant bastard, but hey, I'm asking for help. So, if it's in the report, this is a humble request to indulge my ignorance and show me where it is. Unless someone spoonfeeds it to me, I'm at a loss. Thanks to whoever takes pity on me and tells me where exactly (link and page number would be great) I can find this info. Can't Take My Gorram Sky -------------- Nullius in verba. (Take nobody's word.)
Monday, April 9, 2007 8:49 AM
SHINYED
Monday, April 9, 2007 9:15 AM
Monday, April 9, 2007 1:48 PM
FREMDFIRMA
Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:35 AM
Wednesday, November 19, 2008 11:25 AM
Wednesday, November 19, 2008 1:23 PM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL