Climate Change - The Scientific Debate (Vol. II)
Discussion
juliussneezer said:
PRTVR said:
Mostly the problem is what you do with the data, they have started to alter it, even retrospectively if you cool the past you warm the present, sadly the science is been used to promote an agenda.
I thought this was a serious thread.Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
Edited by PRTVR on Thursday 6th June 06:35
PRTVR said:
juliussneezer said:
PRTVR said:
Mostly the problem is what you do with the data, they have started to alter it, even retrospectively if you cool the past you warm the present, sadly the science is been used to promote an agenda.
I thought this was a serious thread.Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
Edited by PRTVR on Thursday 6th June 06:35
PRTVR said:
Altering data is serious.
Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
How do you know it's 6°C? What makes you so sure your thermometer isn't also part of your imaginary conspiracy?Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
I don't believe you anyway, because I'm only wearing a t-shirt.
Edited by durbster on Thursday 6th June 08:43
durbster said:
PRTVR said:
Altering data is serious.
Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
How do you know it's 6°C? What makes you so sure your thermometer isn't also part of your imaginary conspiracy?Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
I don't believe you anyway, because I'm only wearing a t-shirt.
Edited by durbster on Thursday 6th June 08:43
PRTVR said:
durbster said:
PRTVR said:
Altering data is serious.
Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
How do you know it's 6°C? What makes you so sure your thermometer isn't also part of your imaginary conspiracy?Just to add , in the dales at the moment and 6°C and car has frost on it, June is setting itself up to be the hottest ever.
I don't believe you anyway, because I'm only wearing a t-shirt.
Edited by durbster on Thursday 6th June 08:43
Data that provides confirmation bias = accurate.
Data that proves you're wrong = the data is wrong, everyone involved is corrupt, it's a conspiracy.
durbster said:
Of course. I know the rules by now:
Data that provides confirmation bias = accurate.
Data that proves you're wrong = the data is wrong, everyone involved is corrupt, it's a conspiracy.
But you are a bit slow on understanding, my comment was tongue in cheek, hence the smiley.Data that provides confirmation bias = accurate.
Data that proves you're wrong = the data is wrong, everyone involved is corrupt, it's a conspiracy.
Getragdogleg said:
durbster said:
Of course. I know the rules by now:
Data that provides confirmation bias = accurate.
That could be posted by both sides of the argument to be honest...Data that provides confirmation bias = accurate.
Getragdogleg said:
I have two identical thermometers at my house, one on the back door, one on the front, the back door read 15 degrees while the front door read 23 earlier.
They are 30 ft apart at best shade, wind, position in relation to other hot/cold things all play their part in this.
My problem is with other factors not being taken into consideration and then the sweeping statements like "hottest may on record in the UK" being taken as gospel.
Sure a little box in a car park or on a roof will give you the state of the temp and sun duration at that location only. Go 40ft in any direction and It may well be very different.
Even my cars cant agree on a temp and they are next to each other on the drive.
Well fThey are 30 ft apart at best shade, wind, position in relation to other hot/cold things all play their part in this.
My problem is with other factors not being taken into consideration and then the sweeping statements like "hottest may on record in the UK" being taken as gospel.
Sure a little box in a car park or on a roof will give you the state of the temp and sun duration at that location only. Go 40ft in any direction and It may well be very different.
Even my cars cant agree on a temp and they are next to each other on the drive.
k me, someone call the Met Office... For the better part of 200 years they've been doing it wrong. GDL, can you dig out the cal certificates for your various thermometers and all the data on how you chose their site locations? That will be necessary to show those b
ds where they've gone wrong. Bloody meteorologists, carefully considering the method of measurements when everyone knows that the correct scientific approach is to nail a thermometer outside your door.HarryW said:
Chilly for June too, went to bed without a jumper last night and awoke in the middle of the night freezing as id kicked off the duvet, took me ages to warm back up.
I don’t suppose June will be a record month too, let’s see what the data says….
It depends what happens in the next 24 days though.I don’t suppose June will be a record month too, let’s see what the data says….
Yes, we've only had a couple of warm days in June so far, but if we wake up tomorrow to 40+degree "oh crap why didn't I buy an air conditioner" weather, and the same for three weeks, it could indeed end up as a record breaker.
donkmeister said:
Well fk me, someone call the Met Office... For the better part of 200 years they've been doing it wrong.
GDL, can you dig out the cal certificates for your various thermometers and all the data on how you chose their site locations? That will be necessary to show those bds where they've gone wrong. Bloody meteorologists, carefully considering the method of measurements when everyone knows that the correct scientific approach is to nail a thermometer outside your door.
An 8C difference between air temps at the front and back of the house beggars belief unless one of the thermometers is in direct sun of course, but why bring that up if so? That would be more a demonstation of how human perceptions can be skewed, not weather station thermometers which are in a stevenson screen boxk me, someone call the Met Office... For the better part of 200 years they've been doing it wrong. GDL, can you dig out the cal certificates for your various thermometers and all the data on how you chose their site locations? That will be necessary to show those b
ds where they've gone wrong. Bloody meteorologists, carefully considering the method of measurements when everyone knows that the correct scientific approach is to nail a thermometer outside your door.Global warming isn't about whether it happens to be chillier in your back garden though.
Having said that - there is little doubt that it's chillier in my dad's garden this year.
He lived in the same house for over 50 years and it was chilly in the 60's warmed up generally through the 70s and then went cooler again.
This year has been the chilliest for many years though.
Having said that - there is little doubt that it's chillier in my dad's garden this year.
He lived in the same house for over 50 years and it was chilly in the 60's warmed up generally through the 70s and then went cooler again.
This year has been the chilliest for many years though.
A genuine question to something that has always puzzled me with these 100 year + records...
How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
remedy said:
A genuine question to something that has always puzzled me with these 100 year + records...
How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
All the data is in the public domain so you can see the records yourself here: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps...How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
As you can see on there they were recording to one decimal place even back in the mid-19th century. I suppose you don't really need sophisticated equipment to get that.
The temperature record is always going to be an approximation. Nobody's really saying that there is no uncertainty around day X being the hottest, especially the further back you go in time. There's every chance that one day in 1928 was actually hotter but there wasn't enough data in the right places to record it, so it can never be more certain than saying day X is the hottest ever according to the data we have.
remedy said:
A genuine question to something that has always puzzled me with these 100 year + records...
How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
Whilst I appreciate that your question is really "blimey, how did those clever Victorians manage it?" it's important to distinguish between accuracy and resolution.How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
If I buy a thermometer that has 1 decimal place resolution, that doesn't mean it is accurate to 1 decimal place. Nor does it mean its calibration will agree with other thermometers that came off the same production line.
Even if it's attached to something expensive, like a car, it is unlikely to have an accurate calibration unless it has been bought as a calibrated device.
As a real world example of how a precise number reported doesn't equal an accurate measurement, I bought some no-name feeler gauges off Bezos Big Bazaar to set the valve lash on my S2000. I cleaned them and measured them with an expensive, properly calibrated and certified Mitutoyo micrometer and most of the set was were miles out. I think the closest was still over 10% out. Even though the gauges were reporting a very precise number (i.e. the one etched on), they were nowhere near that number. Some were high, some were low.
durbster said:
remedy said:
A genuine question to something that has always puzzled me with these 100 year + records...
How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
All the data is in the public domain so you can see the records yourself here: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps...How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
As you can see on there they were recording to one decimal place even back in the mid-19th century. I suppose you don't really need sophisticated equipment to get that.
kerplunk said:
durbster said:
remedy said:
A genuine question to something that has always puzzled me with these 100 year + records...
How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
All the data is in the public domain so you can see the records yourself here: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps...How were the thermometers used pre 1900s capable of measuring to the 0.1 Deg accuracies that our digital versions have now? Technology has increased so much even in the last 20 years that accuracy will be higher now.
How can we compare a day temp of 16.3 with an 1880 recording and say today is the hottest ever?
As you can see on there they were recording to one decimal place even back in the mid-19th century. I suppose you don't really need sophisticated equipment to get that.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff