I don’t think you understand what “cherry picking” means.
Presumably ‘Raoul’ is referring to ‘stevengoddard.wordpress.com’, as he/she was replying to your message quoting it.
I’m curious though. I followed your link and it showed a graph with a very cold spell at the moment, with rather wild fluctuations up to that, getting more and more extreme as time moved on. The current cold spell on your graph seems to tie in with the graphic that started this BB entry, which also shows North USA as being a bit chilly. Yet shows Russia as being way above average.
Thus, globally, the overall temp has risen. So, USA isn’t immune to temp variation, your graph shows that, and it being cold in the US, but still being warmer over all, globally, is also shown.
I know nothing about climate and climate change. At all. Really, proper know nothing.
What I find interesting is the graphs that are churned out, presumably to appeal to people just like me, that don’t actually support the view people are using them for. Even more interesting is the wierd combining of belief, politics and science (which is a process, not a belief) that seems to dominate my friends across the pond, in life and message boards.
Not just some dude with a blog, but Steven Goddard; bartm had already cited him on the previous topic, and chgoliz pointed out that was known as a dishonest source. The he should keep citing it, and then act confused when somebody mentions that wordpress site as his source, makes it plain how interested he is in an honest look at global warming.
2 Likes
In what way is he dishonest? Is the data fake? Be specific.
There’s a link in that post, to the link chgoliz gave you. Are you saying you can’t or didn’t follow it? Because it’s really unimpressive either way. As far as your new citation about this being the coldest US year on record, that really doesn’t show up from the NOAA data, which makes me wonder where Goddard got his data; unfortunately he didn’t give any references.
2 Likes
I love that film.
2 Likes
I have an honest question for you, bartm. Nothing to do with climate change since you have made it very clear that you already have all the answers you need on that topic (even if I and countless other scientists could show you literally tons of evidence that you are incorrect in your conclusions).
My question is: do you get paid for this? Or do you search for blogs that cover climate change (no matter how incidentally) and jump into the comments with both feet?
I respond to climate change misinformation because I have a PhD in palaeoclimatology and feel a strong obligation to educate and correct the blatant misrepresentations I see posted. I’m under no illusion I will change you or your fellow travelers’ minds, but I can prevent misinformation from further confusing others without my professional background. I don’t seek these topics out, just respond to them when they pop up in communities I follow - the same way I would try to correct your misunderstandings (politely) if I met you in person.
You appear to have been assigned to BoingBoing to post party talking points. Or maybe you just enjoy reading stuff that outrages you and then arguing with people in the comments. Do centrists and liberals do the same on Breitbart.com, or National Review Online (I don’t know because I don’t read those sites).
I guess what I’m asking is “what do you get out of this exchange”?
9 Likes
I don’t think you understand what “cherry picking” means.
1 Like
Would you agree that Michael Mann was dishonest when he cherry-picked data using tree ring data for pre-1960 and deleted tree ring data post-1960 because it showed a temperature decline? Do you suppose that is why he went all the way to the Virginia Supreme Court to avoid releasing his data and methodology?
3 Likes
I can answer that if you want, but not as a distraction from the disingenuous material you linked. After all, I answered you about Goddard, and then asked you a question first: are you willing to acknowlege the sources you quoted give a dishonest picture? Because I’m not playing along with a Gish gallop.
Edit: no, again, I see you’re not. Well then.
3 Likes
How are they dishonest? The data is real. And the article from today’s BB article uses NOAA data. The article from the NY Times uses NOAA data.
The graphic may be accurate. Unfortunately, the eastern U. S. was one of the few, small regions of the planet which didn’t have a very warm winter. What bartm did was cherry-pick his data, a typical tactic of pseudoscientific trolls.
2 Likes
The warmest post on record is starting to be this one. Cool it people, or I’ll be having to eat more.
does a better fed luck dragon grant more wishes?
Again dudes, I’m a don’t push your luck dragon. We don’t grant wishes, but our farts are brutal if we eat too much.
The cold winter experienced by the NE U.S. skewed the data for the whole country. The data for the whole planet is a refutation of the data you cite, not the other way around.
4 Likes
The True Cause Of Global Warming Won’t Restore Your Faith In Humanity
You’re right, the NOAA graphic you cited was the cherry picking. The ancient NYT article was simply incorrect.
2 Likes
It really doesn’t seem like it, though. Goddard’s graph shows the temperature cumulative to May 6. That’s a little hard to get from the NOAA site now, but I can get the temperatures through May or April. Here they are superimposed:
The current year is a little cool for the reason you say, and of course the 2014 May is probably low because its last week hasn’t happened yet. But there’s no indication of anything that might suggest the upward trend has reversed, let alone the coldest on record. It makes Goddard’s unsourced claim look pretty specious.
1 Like
