Slashdot Mirror
NASA: July 2016 Was Earth's Warmest Month On Record (weather.com)
mdsolar quotes a report from The Weather Channel: Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S), operated by the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), calculated the global average July temperature was nearly one-fifth of a degree Celsius higher than previous July temperature records set in 2015 and in 2009. July was also 0.55 degrees Celsius higher than the July average for 1981-2010. Compared to the July average, the south-central part of the United States including Texas and into northern Mexico were the most anomalously warm for North America. Globally, portions of western Russia and the Southern Ocean were warmest compared to average. In Russia, fires and an anthrax outbreak have been blamed on warmer than average temperatures. Each of the last 12 months has been the warmest on record for their respective months. This is due to a combination of global climate variability and human activity according to C3S. July is typically the warmest month of the year globally because the Northern Hemisphere has more land masses than the Southern Hemisphere. (NASA GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP) confirms today.)
It's the other way around. Warming has thawed sites where frozen bodies of animals killed by 20th century anthrax outbreaks, and those carcasses have now caused numerous cases of anthrax in animals and people in Siberia. You just got the relationship backwards. :-)
French - The lingua franca of Europe!
For pseudoscientific advocates all that counts is a response is made. The response doesn't have to be true, it doesn't even have to make sense. But what is necessary is that some sort of criticism, no matter how moronic, false or absurd, exists, so that all the other advocates of pseudoscience can declare "You see, someone made a response, so your theory is wrong!!!!"
Answers In Genesis has done this for years in attacking biology. Some of the objections, like the bizarre moon dust claims, are so incredibly idiotic that it's hard to imagine anyone taking them seriously, and one suspects that the formulators of such claims don't take them seriously. But gullible people who want to hear how their ideology or religion is totally true will lap it up, because it gives them a quick retort. In reality such claims are made to make the advocate of pseudoscience feel better, because I suspect most of them, deep down, know what they believe and what they're saying is utter nonsense.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The adjustments generally used (which always have to be performed when you mix data from different measurement techniques) are lowering the recorded temperature. You are either woefully ignorant of this field, or are being intellectually dishonest.
The climategate link which showed absolutely nothing wrong?
Correction factors are used for systematic errors.
Correct. And if you read the link, that's exactly what the NOAA corrections were: they corrected for known systematic errors, such as the change from fluid-in-glass thermometers to electronically-measured thermistors.
The measurement errors are random errors.
Random errors can be reduced by taking many measurements (which NOAA also does). The random error decreases as the square root of the number of measurements.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com