Is climate change risk an invention of self interested and stupid?

That's what I said all along, learn to pay attention. GFM objected to the 30 year average reference value asking what makes it "holy." Go back and check for yourself.

 

Anomalies ARE mathematically calculated, therefore they ARE mathematics even if you know nothing about mathematics.

 

Correct. However, they are NOT measurements, as you've been asserting this whole time. They are determined ("mathematically calculated") FROM measurements (ie, absolute temperature measurements) AFTER THE FACT.

Correct.

Projection Fallacy.

 

Precisely this.

 

No, you've said all along that anomalies are measurements, which is incorrect, and that absolute temperature measurements are not needed because "real scientists use anomalies, not absolute temperatures", which is also incorrect.

You've now completely lost track of your own line of argumentation.

Yes, I asked why 30 years is "holy" compared to any other amount of time. A 30 year time frame is very likely going to yield different results than a 2,000 year time frame.

 

I think he is a soulless, amoral greed robot. One might almost be tempted to believe all the absurd anti-CO2 hate propaganda, except that now Paulson has endorsed it.

 

We get it. You like to make assertions and you think they refute the science. Lol

 

I understand why you won’t type it in.

 

They are a MEASUREMENT of the current state compared to the MEASURED average. Anomalies START with a current MEASUREMENT that is then compared to past MEASUREMENTS. No absolute temperature of the Earth is needed.

 

Everything I said is correct and everything you say is wrong, for example, there is no 2,000 year time frame because we do not have 2,000 years of direct instrument measurements.

 

Not a measurement; a determination.

Not a measurement; a result of performing a statistical analysis.

Thus anomalies are not measurements. They are determined after the fact FROM measurements.

What mysterious "measurements" are you making reference to if not absolute temperature measurements?

In order to have "anomalies" of "Earth's temperature", you MUST have measurements of Earth's temperature to derive them from (aka "know what Earth's temperature is both then and now"), since anomalies are determined after the fact FROM measurements.

 

Nope, you've been wrong this whole time.

Precisely my point... We can't just deem those years to be irrelevant (and the last 30 years to be the "holy" years) simply because we don't have data from back then... Maybe Earth was warmer back then than it is right now?? Yet, here we are.

 

As I have shown you many times, the anomalies are unique to each temperature station, the sum total of all the anomalies from all the stations gives the global TREND without any need for a global temp, and that is because anomalies measure TRENDS!!!!

 

No. NOT a measurement. Anomalies are determined; they are not measured.

No contradiction at all. Being determined FROM a measurement is not in and of itself a measurement. In the English language, words have meanings.

Those are absolute temperatures. Thus, absolute temperature readings ARE necessary for knowing the temperature of the Earth (as well as for determining the anomalies you keep blabbing about), which is what I've been saying all along and what you've been denying all along... "real scientists use anomalies, not absolute temperatures!! blah blah blah"

Yes, you can determine anomalies for each station from the measured temperature data for each station. Whoopity doo...

Numerous math errors. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize by paired randR. Failure to eliminate biasing factors (location/time). Failure to declare a variance. Failure to calculate a margin of error using said variance.

Those individual temperature stations (even when determining anomalies from that data and summing those anomalies) do not accurately represent Earth, dude... You are making math errors galore...

Trends are not measured; they are determined... as anomalies are determined. Absolute temperature is what is being measured (via instrumentation that is properly and regularly calibrated).

 

No they are LOCAL temps, not the global temp of the Earth. Anomalies are used to measure TRENDS, not the global temperature of the Earth.

 

The first true thing you've ever posted, and I bet you didn't even realize it!

 

Pure hogwash!

 

Precisely.

Trends are not measured, they are determined.

 

By measurements.

 

Thank you for finally admitting that the global temp of the Earth is not needed for anomalies.

 

Funny, I thought the same about you.

 

Logic error (Argument of the Stone Fallacy). Failure to form a counterargument beyond appealing to absurdity.

 

Not "by" measurements... FROM measurements.

 

Continued denial of Mathematics...

 

Logic error (Argument of the Stone Fallacy). Failure to form a counterargument beyond appealing to absurdity.