Re: The Real Junk Science

On Mon, 30 May 05 12:27:37 GMT, lparker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:

>In article <8cai919j8rtv64bqinv9rbean9rjmkm8i9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>   Wm James <wrjames.remove@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>On Thu, 26 May 2005 21:59:35 GMT, "Coby Beck" <cbeck@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>"Wm James" <wrjames.remove@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>news:9jja91dt5o9bemi9de14jd13ol2j6gkuo9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>> I showed you NASA's own pages:
>>>> http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature/
>>>>
>>>> Now you want to pont to a university's pages as proof that NASA's OWN
>>>> PAGES do not reflect what NASA says?
>>>
>>>This is not a NASA study.
>>>
>>>"The GHCC is a partner****p comprised of organizational elements from
NASA
>>>Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), the State of Alabama's Space
Science
>>>and Technology Alliance (SSTA), and the Universities Space Research
>>>Association (USRA)"
>>
>>NASA was an active participant, particularly at the data collection
>>level. 
>
>Liar.  It says no such thing.

What says no such thing?  Your parrot trainer?

>>>> It's a direct quote from http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature/
>>>
>>>It is 5 years old.
>>>"Last Updated: June 14, 2000"
>>
>>Irrelevant.  
>
>Then Clinton is president.

Nice to see your ability to sup****t your position is at least
consistant.

>?The only thing that's changed if 5 years of more total
>>failures of the chicken little models.  Five years is meaningless
>>anyway, you can't undo centuries of data showing the hoax is a hoax
>>with a testimonial or a irrlevant 5 year sample. 
>>
>>>Get the real story here:
>>>http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
>>
>>Read the DATA.  
>
>Did you?  At the GISS site?

Yes, you should try it.  First learn what data is so you wont continue
to make the same errors. While you are at it, learn what GISS stands
for, what it means, and see if you can figure out the obvious problem
in attempting to use it to "prove" your hoax. 

>>Do you know what "data" is?  From your link:
>>"We modify the GHCN/USHCN/SCAR data in two stages to get to the
>>station data on which all our tables, graphs, and maps are based: in
>>stage 1 we try to combine at each location the time records of the
>>various sources; in stage 2 we adjust the non-rural stations in such a
>>way that their longterm trend of annual means is as close as possible
>>to that of the mean of the neighboring rural stations. Non-rural
>>stations that cannot be adjusted are dropped."
>>
>>And keep in mind that page is only dealing with these "adjusted" and
>>"modified" surface temperatures. 
>>
>>
>>Try here:
>>http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/hl_measuretemp.htm
>>============================================================
>>Even with Needed Corrections, Data Still Don't Show the Expected
>>Signature of Global Warming
>>
>>By 
>>Dr. Roy Spencer 
>>Senior Scientist for Climate Studies 
>>NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center
>>
>>Originally Published: 8/13/98
>
>Geez, James, are you this stupid or do you think we are?  1998?

You must be, othrwise you'd already be aware of the absolutley
laughable attempt to prop up a global climate changte hoax with half a
solar cycle of data.  Learn a little science before attempting to
preach nonsense to those who already have.

William R. James