Spy satellite are great things and can photograph pretty much anything given a long enough period of time; the problem is they're only going to be over the exact patch of dirt you're interested in perhaps once a week, and it might be cloudy (or night time!) when that happens.
There are numerous orbits that allow for imaging the Earth surface at regular intervals, some like the Molniya orbit can be set up with extremely long dwell time over the area of interest, semi-synchronous pass over twice a day and there are non-synchronous orbits so they can image every where within a day or ever several hours. If Google Earth is sharp enough that I can see my mailbox, imagine what the big-boys can do. The KH-11 is basically a Hubble telescope with a 95 minute orbital period looking at the ground. Try hiding something from that.
The shuttle cabin pressure is 14.7 PSI, (0 feet), and the external pressure is 0, where an airliner has a cabin pressure of 10.916 PSI, (8,000 feet) and an external pressure of 3.4580 PSI (35,000 feet) for a difference of 7.458 psi; so the shuttle is a little under twice the pressure of a typical commercial airliner.
When did OSHA start considering workplace temperatures of 95 or higher a safety hazard, I'm sure a lot of construction and kitchen workers would be interested in that one?
Did Jones proceed correctly while homogenizing the data? Most climatologists still believe Jones' contention that he did not intentionally manipulate the data. However, that belief will have to remain rooted in good faith. Under the pressure of McIntyre's attacks, Jones had to admit something incredible: He had deleted his notes on how he performed the homogenization. This means that it is not possible to reconstruct how the raw data turned into his temperature curve.
Sorry about using too strong a voice, I've seen too much of either your a true believer of the church of AGW or your an infadel heretic deserving a fate worse than dead.
they actually delete their copy of the data, but more embarrassingly they also destroyed the documentation of exactly how the value-added dataset they produced was actually produced.
You have a reference for that?
what part of
According to CRU's Web site, "Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data."
didn't you understand? Additionally I didn't say they were wrong, but I will say that because they can't show that their premises are correct, their conclusion becomes questionable.
I suppose that depends on your definition of paint, glass is around 6 - 7 on the mohs, volcanic ash is around 5+ seems like it wouldn't be particularly difficult the develop an alumina based paint, Corundum is about Mohs 9.0, the trick is to keep the filler high and the binders low. We use composites at work that are 90% filler and very difficult to polish after they've cured.
Consider that most of us in academia would rather be caught killing someone than forging data. Though in this case, the rest of the scientific community knows that the allegations are false anyway.
I've never seen where anyone who seemed rational to me said any professional climatologist intentionally changed data in a premeditated manor to influence the results of the output to support a preconceived hypothesis. I have seen where data was allegedly made up by third parties such as when someone didn't go outside in 40 below weather to read a thermometer that was possibly surrounded by man-eating polar bears; and I've seen where a minus sign was obviously missing from METAR reports and drifting buoys. I've seen evidence that supports the notion that some of the data homogenization programs didn't preform properly such as reducing an urban thermometers reading to eliminate UHI by matching rural thermometers, then raising them all back up. I see that confirmation bias may have lead honorable men to be too excepting of data and computer outputs rather than forgery.
I have to wonder though - wouldn't the oil companies know that their propaganda artists are the same ones who failed the tobacco lobby?
Your assuming that the Oil Companies want to defeat the apocalyptic global warming crowd, rather than selling even more profitable "green" fuels that will sustain their companies long after petroleum has peaked.
Citing a statement on the research unit's Web site, CEI blasted the research unit for the "suspicious destruction of its original data." According to CRU's Web site, "Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data."
they actually delete their copy of the data, but more embarrassingly they also destroyed the documentation of exactly how the value-added dataset they produced was actually produced. They can not at this time,
reacquire the original raw data, it's been changed
re-quality-control the raw data, they're not completely sure how they did it
re-homogenize the data again they're not completely sure how they did it
and they really need to go back to square 1 and reproduce what they've done; reproducibility is a corner stone of science. It's the Apocalyptic Global Warming crowd that needs to prove that
The Globe has warmed significantly
the warming is unprecedented and therefore man-made
the warming is not do to UHI, Urban Heat Islands, or land use changes
reducing CO2 to pre-industry revolution levels will return temperatures to pre-industry revolution levels also;
I'm perfectly happy using more accurate satellite data, but that only goes back to 1979 so it can never support or refute AGW historically.
Refuting CEI's claims of data-destruction, Jones said, "We haven't destroyed anything. The data is still there -- you can still get these stations from the [NOAA] National Climatic Data Center."
That's almost right, the data there undergoes continuous quality control, new data is added and old data is revised when they find a problem, (and there are plenty of problem datums in there) so it's not exactly the same. If you want it you can go to NOAA and download the ghcn, Global Historic Climate Network, but be advised it's about a 1.8GB compressed download and decompresses to about 5.8GB of data. On a modern computer, running Linux, some Perl scripts, revision control and a database like postgresql you can do anything the bigboys in climatology can do and from what I've seen do it better. The data itself has a lot of documentation with it, a lot of it is wrong or misleading, if you like challenges, GHCN will do it.
procurement contract and system specs revealed that a computerized log is kept permanently on every video and audio recording, showing when anyone uploads it, flags it for retention, plays it, copies it or deletes it.... Several lawyers, including prominent Seattle civil rights attorney Lembhard Howell, said they were completely unaware of the video logs, and glad to be informed since they've been denied police videos based on the 90-day excuse. "Now I know what to ask for," said Howell.
now everyone knows, I suspect that this will be asked for nationwide. Even where the logs aren't kept, defense attorneys will spin it into a chain-of-custody problem for the jurors that think every case should be CSI caliber.
A lot of it is faked, especially arctic data, how likely is a civilian contractor working on the DEW line or a Russian out in Siberia to go outside, in -40 degree weather and possible get eaten by a polar bear to read a thermometer verses get writing what they got yesterday +- 1 or 2 degrees?
If you want ground station air temperature data it's at ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/, what's there is as close to raw primary data as anybody has. Everybody else's products have been "value added" i.e., cooked, homogenized, and adjusted.
If Group B cannot duplicate the experiment and get the same data (and knowing that means being able to compare both sets) that calls the experiment as a whole into question.
What if group B notices that a temperature station one day reports the temperature is -12.4C one day and 10 minutes later it's +12.4 C the next? On 2010-Apr-21 22:10, Drifting buoy 48534 did just that and that's an automated report, imagine the fun and games when human error gets added in! The data is bad, there is a lot of bad data points in the records and the records were never intended for the purpose they are being used for so quality control is even more critical. We really need a large number of human eyeballs looking at the data to find these problems.
Actually I was thinking heading North-Northeast from New York, then over Greenland, across the Arctic Ocean and south to Moscow from west of the Scandinavian peninsula; but looking at the map it is more circuitous than I though.
Either that or go north of the cloud to Moscow and take the train back. Europeans generally brag about their ground transportation systems and deservedly so, I'm amazed at how much air travel there seems to be. In Germany when I was there it was trivial to catch a short taxi ride to a bus station and ride the bus to a train station and go virtually anywhere in Europe; I guess they've became "americanized" and have to either fly or drive now.
Earthquakes look pretty typical to me, notoriety isn't the same thing as frequency or intensity. Also the glaciers have been melting for the entire Holocene, so that's really not unusual and to top it all off the polar ice caps have rebounded to normal levels. Some scientists have made a similar assertion to icecap melting leading to increased vulcanism;
They said there was no sign that the current eruption from below the Eyjafjallajokull glacier that has paralysed flights over northern Europe was linked to global warming. The glacier is too small and light to affect local geology. Ice cap thaw may awaken Icelandic volcanoes
Should of told them you were clinically depressed and trying to refuse service to you was a violation of you ADA rights and you are going to sue them for the damages inflicted.
I think a better option would be to take the lawyer that handled the case, probably on contingency, and have him swing a hammer for 40 hrs on a Habitat for Humanity project; OMG missing Golf for 5 days, that's cruel and inhuman!
Back in the day when the belief in god, gods and/or good and evil spirits were more common, people had something to blame besides each other or dumb luck.
Slashdot Mirror
We might be seeing an Asphalt Volcano in the making here.
Who needs sharks with fricked lasers on their heads when you have ice bullets!
Spy satellite are great things and can photograph pretty much anything given a long enough period of time; the problem is they're only going to be over the exact patch of dirt you're interested in perhaps once a week, and it might be cloudy (or night time!) when that happens.
There are numerous orbits that allow for imaging the Earth surface at regular intervals, some like the Molniya orbit can be set up with extremely long dwell time over the area of interest, semi-synchronous pass over twice a day and there are non-synchronous orbits so they can image every where within a day or ever several hours. If Google Earth is sharp enough that I can see my mailbox, imagine what the big-boys can do. The KH-11 is basically a Hubble telescope with a 95 minute orbital period looking at the ground. Try hiding something from that.
The shuttle cabin pressure is 14.7 PSI, (0 feet), and the external pressure is 0, where an airliner has a cabin pressure of 10.916 PSI, (8,000 feet) and an external pressure of 3.4580 PSI (35,000 feet) for a difference of 7.458 psi; so the shuttle is a little under twice the pressure of a typical commercial airliner.
good stuff, thanks for the links.
When did OSHA start considering workplace temperatures of 95 or higher a safety hazard, I'm sure a lot of construction and kitchen workers would be interested in that one?
Sorry about using too strong a voice, I've seen too much of either your a true believer of the church of AGW or your an infadel heretic deserving a fate worse than dead.
they actually delete their copy of the data, but more embarrassingly they also destroyed the documentation of exactly how the value-added dataset they produced was actually produced.
You have a reference for that?
what part of
didn't you understand? Additionally I didn't say they were wrong, but I will say that because they can't show that their premises are correct, their conclusion becomes questionable.
I suppose that depends on your definition of paint, glass is around 6 - 7 on the mohs, volcanic ash is around 5+ seems like it wouldn't be particularly difficult the develop an alumina based paint, Corundum is about Mohs 9.0, the trick is to keep the filler high and the binders low. We use composites at work that are 90% filler and very difficult to polish after they've cured.
Consider that most of us in academia would rather be caught killing someone than forging data. Though in this case, the rest of the scientific community knows that the allegations are false anyway.
I've never seen where anyone who seemed rational to me said any professional climatologist intentionally changed data in a premeditated manor to influence the results of the output to support a preconceived hypothesis. I have seen where data was allegedly made up by third parties such as when someone didn't go outside in 40 below weather to read a thermometer that was possibly surrounded by man-eating polar bears; and I've seen where a minus sign was obviously missing from METAR reports and drifting buoys. I've seen evidence that supports the notion that some of the data homogenization programs didn't preform properly such as reducing an urban thermometers reading to eliminate UHI by matching rural thermometers, then raising them all back up. I see that confirmation bias may have lead honorable men to be too excepting of data and computer outputs rather than forgery.
I have to wonder though - wouldn't the oil companies know that their propaganda artists are the same ones who failed the tobacco lobby?
Your assuming that the Oil Companies want to defeat the apocalyptic global warming crowd, rather than selling even more profitable "green" fuels that will sustain their companies long after petroleum has peaked.
The point is
they actually delete their copy of the data, but more embarrassingly they also destroyed the documentation of exactly how the value-added dataset they produced was actually produced.
They can not at this time,
and they really need to go back to square 1 and reproduce what they've done; reproducibility is a corner stone of science. It's the Apocalyptic Global Warming crowd that needs to prove that
I'm perfectly happy using more accurate satellite data, but that only goes back to 1979 so it can never support or refute AGW historically.
That's almost right, the data there undergoes continuous quality control, new data is added and old data is revised when they find a problem, (and there are plenty of problem datums in there) so it's not exactly the same. If you want it you can go to NOAA and download the ghcn, Global Historic Climate Network, but be advised it's about a 1.8GB compressed download and decompresses to about 5.8GB of data. On a modern computer, running Linux, some Perl scripts, revision control and a database like postgresql you can do anything the bigboys in climatology can do and from what I've seen do it better. The data itself has a lot of documentation with it, a lot of it is wrong or misleading, if you like challenges, GHCN will do it.
No, obviously your confusing
with
It's worse than that,
now everyone knows, I suspect that this will be asked for nationwide. Even where the logs aren't kept, defense attorneys will spin it into a chain-of-custody problem for the jurors that think every case should be CSI caliber.
A lot of it is faked, especially arctic data, how likely is a civilian contractor working on the DEW line or a Russian out in Siberia to go outside, in -40 degree weather and possible get eaten by a polar bear to read a thermometer verses get writing what they got yesterday +- 1 or 2 degrees?
If you want ground station air temperature data it's at ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/, what's there is as close to raw primary data as anybody has. Everybody else's products have been "value added" i.e., cooked, homogenized, and adjusted.
If Group B cannot duplicate the experiment and get the same data (and knowing that means being able to compare both sets) that calls the experiment as a whole into question.
Group A can't even duplicate Group A's results.
What if group B notices that a temperature station one day reports the temperature is -12.4C one day and 10 minutes later it's +12.4 C the next? On 2010-Apr-21 22:10, Drifting buoy 48534 did just that and that's an automated report, imagine the fun and games when human error gets added in! The data is bad, there is a lot of bad data points in the records and the records were never intended for the purpose they are being used for so quality control is even more critical. We really need a large number of human eyeballs looking at the data to find these problems.
Actually I was thinking heading North-Northeast from New York, then over Greenland, across the Arctic Ocean and south to Moscow from west of the Scandinavian peninsula; but looking at the map it is more circuitous than I though.
The problematic winds, blow from the Northwest to the Southeast, the airport is west of the volcano so the ash cloud blows away from it.
Either that or go north of the cloud to Moscow and take the train back. Europeans generally brag about their ground transportation systems and deservedly so, I'm amazed at how much air travel there seems to be. In Germany when I was there it was trivial to catch a short taxi ride to a bus station and ride the bus to a train station and go virtually anywhere in Europe; I guess they've became "americanized" and have to either fly or drive now.
Earthquakes look pretty typical to me, notoriety isn't the same thing as frequency or intensity. Also the glaciers have been melting for the entire Holocene, so that's really not unusual and to top it all off the polar ice caps have rebounded to normal levels. Some scientists have made a similar assertion to icecap melting leading to increased vulcanism;
that isn't the case here.
Should of told them you were clinically depressed and trying to refuse service to you was a violation of you ADA rights and you are going to sue them for the damages inflicted.
I think a better option would be to take the lawyer that handled the case, probably on contingency, and have him swing a hammer for 40 hrs on a Habitat for Humanity project; OMG missing Golf for 5 days, that's cruel and inhuman!
Back in the day when the belief in god, gods and/or good and evil spirits were more common, people had something to blame besides each other or dumb luck.