10

GOLDSTEIN: Feds scrapped 100 years of data on climate change

Posted by $ nickursis 5 years, 7 months ago to Government
29 comments | Share | Flag

So, for all you who buy into the smash and grab called "climate change", get this: Climate is defined as: "The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) describes climate "normals" as "reference points used by climatologists to compare current climatological trends to that of the past or what is considered 'normal'. A Normal is defined as the arithmetic average of a climate element (e.g. temperature) over a 30-year period. A 30 year period is used, as it is long enough to filter out any interannual variation or anomalies, but also short enough to be able to show longer climatic trends."[9] The WMO originated from the International Meteorological Organization which set up a technical commission for climatology in 1929. At its 1934 Wiesbaden meeting the technical commission designated the thirty-year period from 1901 to 1930 as the reference time frame for climatological standard normals. In 1982 the WMO agreed to update climate normals, and these were subsequently completed on the basis of climate data from 1 January 1961 to 31 December 1990.[10]" (wikipedia). Now, read this article and explain how, if we use 30 years as measuring periods, we can have "climate change" with only THREE data points? How can you say there is "climate change" when you throw out 70% of the data you don't like? Have you figured it out yet? If they can't lie loud enough to steal your money (read" Carbon tax, cap and trade), then they just "delete" the data? Don't believe their crap. Investigate your data and facts.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by $ 5 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Well, the reality is, data says the earth is cooling, and there are several things at work (solar minimum (which may be "grand" or not, no good data either way yet), the possible pole shift, the increase in cosmic rays due to reduced radiation shielding due to said solar minimum, and changes in circulation patterns due to the solar minimum). All that is provable if you use observed data from the last few hundred years, and predictions based on it seem valid. For example, Montana is about to become snowbound, with up to 4 feet of snow in the mountains, sort of hard to fit into the "no snow we all die" model.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 5 years, 7 months ago
    Let me guess: they deleted "data" that is not supporting their "theory" of man-made climate change.

    Reading the text, I am correct: Temperatures were higher than they are now. Of course it does not fit.

    I also find it odd that the "scientists" behind the delete claim that the reason was this data being "model-driven" .

    The entire climate change hoax is based on modeling. The hockey-stick theory is based on modeling, by omitting crucial data, mind you.

    Obfuscating phony bunch...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 25n56il4 5 years, 7 months ago
    I am weary of hearing about climate change. It seems everyone has an opinion on it and I don't understand a bit of any of it.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo