So nicely coinciding with a period in which I have no time, I have had a burst of over 100 comments in the last week, lately on the temperature record reliability attack article. (Yeah, I know it no PZ Meyers level of activity, but it is all relative, right?)
For the first time in my illustrious blogging career I have not even read them! (which I regret).
Did I miss anything interesting?
- Log in to post comments
If by interesting you mean macho chest beating and recycled denialist crap, then yes. Otherwise, not so much.
I peeked. It's a circle-jerk between crakor, vernon and richard.
Get a room, dudes.
For a moment there i thought you were talking about me, who is this "crakor" of which you speak of dogs arsa?
I suspect a lot of this started up again as a result of the package sent by the Heartland Inst. to hundreds of TV weather folks. The package contained a glossy booklet with an article claiming the temp. record is unreliable.
Indeed, it is the same old recycled junk long since dismissed in real science journals.
Dan
That's Anthony Watts' vanity press book of fine art photography.
Which he claims scientifically proves that taking pictures of weather stations causes them to warm up or something.
dhogaza,
Taking pictures of a weather station makes it warm up, thats a real funny one.
On the other hand there are standards to which all stations should be built. This ensures that the readings they take are accurate, these accurate readings are then used by various departments to establish many things one being temp trends.
Are you saying we do not need accurate readings to establish trends dhogaza?