How to recognize fraudulent climate data, and false claims

[robinson]

Restarting the MARCH 2020 THREAD ONCE AGAIN!

Scientific fraud? Or political nonsense? Something else?

I became a skeptic in Feb 2010.

Why? What does that even mean?

Inspired by

Skeptic of the phenomenon, its causes, or the appropriate response to it? Or some combination?

What led to your change of mind?

OK. What happened in Feb 2010?

Something in the world in general, or just the month the light-bulb in your head turned on? :roll:

In two days it will be 11 years since it actually started. December 19 2009. I didn't know it at the time. The climategate emails were out, but I wasn't that interested. Like a good skeptic I didn't need to actually look at anything to know what was what.

There had been some malarky about a hockey stick graph for years, but obviously anyone arguing against global warming was a paid shill for fossil fuels, or insane. There had to be something wrong with them.

So here's the short version. I experienced a record shattering blizzard (my first one ever!) starting on the 19th of December 2009.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_ ... n_blizzard

It was actually fun for me, even the shoveling and the inconvenience didn't bother me. First blizzard ever, and the amount of snow was amazing. DC was quite variable in snow amounts, and I didn't actually know that 25 inches of snow was a lot. A lot for anywhere, but definitely a lot of DC

(other locations had 15 inches, some had 3 feet)

It's ironic that as I sit here typing this out, there is another huge blizzard hitting the northeastern US. Deeply ironic. Especially since snow (and the cold that causes it) are fundamental for both my skepticism, climate, data and the arguments about it all. If you find the argument "it is snowing so much because the climate is warmer" either convincing, or ridiculous, I understand.

No, I really do. I actually used that argument in December 2009, that's how unskeptical I was at the time. I explained the blizzard away, by saying it was because it was getting warmer. "More moisture because warmer, means more snow", which as you will see, is still an argument, about snow.

The difference is, now I consider that bullshit, and I know it's bullshit. And the data shows it is bullshit. But I also know the data will probably not change anyone's mind. It certainly won't change the minds of the skeptics who read this topic, who are 100% sure about the matter already.

Those who are skeptical and find it a bullshit argument might nod sagely and then ask, "So what?"

In any case, I don't think it will matter. Not even a little.

Dumping data into the topic will make it matter even less. Is it fraud? Is it a matter of faith? Is it ignorance? Hubris? Politics? Who the fuck can tell?

From a scientific POV, I actually would like to know. But here's the thing. The only way to know, is if you, another human being reading this, is if you tell the truth. If you are honest, and share your view, it might be possible to learn something about this. (hope springs eternal you know)

The last time I started in on this was at the beginning of the lockdowns, and I fucked up my one computer I can run the software on. Not this time. Science!

Because image files just vanish here, I have to host the images on my blog, then go through the extra work of posting here, which means usually after I finish the blog post I don't bother with here.

It's over twice the effort, and I don't care that much.

[robinson]

Starting with the most obvious facts, because they are obvious.

I mean, if you have read this far down you are either interested, or really bored, or who the fuck knows. My hypothesis is that long before this point most people stopped reading, and if you actually are reading, but not engaging, then what the fuck is wrong with you?

heh

Just kidding. I actually know why you are reluctant to respond,.

Especially the current dumb as hell troll

2009, it was supposed to be warmer than ever, which most logical sane people can understand.

This was before the same thing happened so many times the story changed, In 2008, even 2009, it was reasonable to say it was natural variability, just weather, shit happens. But after it happened again, and again, and a trend showed up, colder winters with a shit ton more snow, the story changed.

Now, the record cold and snow has become evidence that it is getting warmer. In 2008 that would have sounded like crazy talk, OK it still sounds like crazy talk in 2020, but the point remains.

Which brings the discussion to the record breaking snow centered on Boston in the winter of 2014-2015
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ene ... l-warming/
https://thinkprogress.org/as-bostons-cr ... a32dcda48/

Now we have the same Kevin Trenberth who noted the record cold and snow in Oct 2009 expertsplaining how record cold and snow actually is from global warming.

What? That's crazy talk. (of course it is)

So if anyone tries to tell you that climate change directly caused Boston’s record-breaking and continuing snowmageddon, that’s not true. What is true, however, is that climate change may have affected the snowstorm — may have made it more likely, may have made it worse than it would have been without so much greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. It bears repeating: “All weather events are affected by climate change because the environment in which they occur is warmer and moister than it used to be.”

The question, then, becomes how? How did the warmer and moister environment in which we now live because of human-caused carbon emissions affect Boston’s historic weather event? Wouldn’t a warmer, moister environment mean less snow? How does that even make sense?

https://thinkprogress.org/as-bostons-cr ... a32dcda48/

The entire expertsplaining is at the link. Both Trenberth and Mann get in on it, Mannsplaining how the record warmth caused more mositure which caused the record snow.

Which is exactly what I thought back in February 2010, all this fucking snow is because global warming.

But in 2015, it was easy to check the data, unlike in 2010. And the data showed there was actually less water in the record snow, It wasn't even a normal amount of precip for Jan-Feb in the record snowfall.

It wasn't some record because of more water falling. It was very very cold, and because the snow ratio is based on temperature, the snow was very heavy (which means snow depth, not weight), which means the Mannsplaining was horseshit.

This can now be shown with graphs and other science shit

[robinson]

One thing I did not mention, is just how bad the records of weather can be, even in the country with the best records. (United States)

Records = recorded data

Most states don't even have a benchmark station, and even the ones run by the NWS have errors and missing months. The best records come from COOP observers, the ones run by the same person or family for a long time. But I digress.

So the latest cluster fuck of unimaginable proportions has to be Texas of course. It's hard to handwave away the biggest disaster in US history, especially when it involves snow. (better to somehow blame it on global warming, climate change, which is exactly what has happened)

Now I will admit I have a failing, and it is simply this. Stupid, wrong explainings bother me. When some internet moron says something stupid, no big deal. But when leading climate scientists do it, it bothers me. Especially when it is so easy to know they are either idiots, or liars. It's actually more likely they are just woke.

I quote

Global warmist are busy trying to decide if it’s a meaningless anomaly, or evidence of global warming

Exactly. Alarmists are so worried about record snowfall, they actually claim it's from global warming.

Oh I know that sounds crazy, but it's 100% true. Easy to prove as well.

The horrific Texas snow and cold is but the latest example of how I know these morons are full of shit.

Here's my prediction. I will provide solid evidence to support my claim. It will make not one bit of difference.

[robinson]

https://twitter.com/antmasiello/status/ ... 36935?s=21

And how to know the data is real

https://twitter.com/ChrisDeVitoWX/statu ... 33601?s=20

So I compare the annual snow data from the KNYC station, and it doesn't match the climate station data.

Turns out there are two different stations in NYC central park!

Wtf?

The GHCN station is 40.7789 -73.9692

And the KNYC one is 40.78333N 73.96667W

[robinson]

I finally have time to get back to the science here.

I know it’s futile, but I enjoy it for its own sake.

[robinson]

I thought I would be stuck at home starting in March 2020

Instead I have worked harder than any other time in my life

[Doctor X]

You posted them.

– J.D.

[robinson]

https://twitter.com/ChrisDeVitoWX/statu ... 33601?s=20

So I compare the annual snow data from the KNYC station, and it doesn't match the climate station data.

Turns out there are two different stations in NYC central park!

Wtf?

The GHCN station is 40.7789 -73.9692

And the KNYC one is 40.78333N 73.96667W

[robinson]

https://twitter.com/chrismartzwx/status ... 29583?s=21

[Pyrrho]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-59571711

Crocodiles turn on humans amid Iran water crisis

The attacks have come at a time when Iran has been suffering acute water shortages and, consequentially, fast-shrinking natural habitats have seen the gandos' food supplies dry up. The starving animals treat humans approaching their territory either as prey or a menace to their evaporating resources.

[robinson]

How do you know that is false?

[robinson]

Didn’t think there would be an answer

Meanwhile …

https://twitter.com/usafacts/status/144 ... 74402?s=21

[robinson]

USA FACTS

We rely only on figures from government agencies and present them without bias. You can use the data to judge the country’s direction for yourself. We don’t answer to a board or political group. We have no agenda other than improving debates — and, by extension, American democracy — with government facts that every American deserves to see.

[robinson]

I’m going to use actual data to show why the government “figures” are fraudulent

I know, I know, it’s hard to imagine the authorities might be liars

[robinson]

It might be hard to believe, but the following matter is something I have observed, argued with, and laughed over, for 12 years now.

12 fucking years, which is why I am in no hurry about it. And also, it won't make one bit of difference. That's something I learned in the last 12 years. Facts, reason, logic, evidence, science, they mean literally nothing when it comes to woke beliefs, politics, or economic political bullshit.

They sure as hell won't make any difference to surprise, my favorite NPC on this board.

I predict woke reports will be in the news, about how this is from how much warmer it is

Increase in precipitation effects. As predicted.

This hand waving always shows up.

In what way is a fact hand waving?

What one learns over the years, is that the more evidence there is, the more detailed and extensive the explaining, the more certain some complete asshat woke will ignore it, or if by some goddamn miracle they understand it, they get it, they will instantly switch to "So what?", which is the point I know I won the day, but that also the pigeon will now shit all over the chessboard.

[robinson]

For those who don't give a shit, which is no doubt almost everybody, here's the simple version, so you can just jump right to the ignoring part, or the "so what?" part. Maybe crack some jokes, post some anime, whatever gets you off.

Back in the old days, the predictions were warmer winters, with more rain, less now and ice. Which is exactly what a warmer winter results in. Might be more precipitation as well, but a warm winter can also be drier, with more sun, less cloudy days.

But when the temperatures are warmer, there is less snow. This is basic meteorology. Unless you are talking about the polar regions, which is a different story. But for major cities, and most of the US, as well as Europe and North Africa, warmer means less snow and ice. Period.

But after an extreme snow event, starting in 2009, the story changed. Now record cold and snow is also evidence that it is warmer. This is complete nonsense, and the data shows this clearly.

That's the simple version.

[robinson]

When it comes to a fraudulent claim about snow amounts and how it was from "more precipitation", rather than the colder conditions, no amount of evidence will sway the true believer.

And for anyone who understand physics and how snow and weather works, no evidence is needed. So extensive publishing is sort of a waste of time. I only do it because I enjoy it, but I also need a lot of time and energy, which after 12 years of this bullshit, is really hard to justify.

[robinson]

Explaining the "how" is probably the hardest part.

[Hammerhead]

It might be hard to believe, but the following matter is something I have observed, argued with, and laughed over, for 12 years now.

12 fucking years, which is why I am in no hurry about it. And also, it won't make one bit of difference. That's something I learned in the last 12 years. Facts, reason, logic, evidence, science, they mean literally nothing when it comes to woke beliefs, politics, or economic political bullshit.

They sure as hell won't make any difference to surprise, my favorite NPC on this board.

I predict woke reports will be in the news, about how this is from how much warmer it is

Increase in precipitation effects. As predicted.

This hand waving always shows up.

In what way is a fact hand waving?

What one learns over the years, is that the more evidence there is, the more detailed and extensive the explaining, the more certain some complete asshat woke will ignore it, or if by some goddamn miracle they understand it, they get it, they will instantly switch to "So what?", which is the point I know I won the day, but that also the pigeon will now shit all over the chessboard.

Are you saying there haven't been increases in precipitation events?

https://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/ ... rise#modal

https://assets.climatecentral.org/image ... Social.jpg

[robinson]

I forgot the most common other responses, “I dont understand what you are showing me”. Or, “what you trying to say?”, and then there is a dozen others, all of which are ways to not ignore or “not understand” the most simple things.

And of of course”you are wrong”, and “why not publish if you are smarter than the experts?”, pretty much anything except to discuss the data.

[robinson]

But to recognize fraud you have to actually know something about the matter, and that’s really impossible part for a NPC, or a woke activist, or anyone who just repeats crap they heard, rather than see for themselves what is happening.

[robinson]

Your opinion is that there is a world wide conspiracy of scientists to lie to you.

https://i.imgur.com/pkwZgWN.jpg

[robinson]

Because I know it's 100% futile, I didn't start a topic called "How to convince a moron he is wrong", I mean, "How to argue with a global alarmists", no, this is about how to recognize fraud, and how to find out a claim is false, regarding climate /weather

If you really want to read an example, there are many many topics, starting in 2009, where I made the mistake of thinking a debate or a discussion of climate change/global warming was possible with skeptics. (it isn't)

[Hammerhead]

Your opinion is that there is a world wide conspiracy of scientists to lie to you.

https://i.imgur.com/pkwZgWN.jpg

A meme. How can I argue with that.

[robinson]

20 years later the story is "more precipitation will lead to more heavy snow storms", which is bullshit. The record snow events were not record precipitation events

The major problem with the snow/temperature issue is that there is no single rule. In general, it is an absolute that there is "more snow" when the air temperature is colder, but this is only true for normal ranges, like most of the US experiences

High mountain areas it is different, but not what you might think.

Certainly, with no doubt, in areas that rarely get snow at all, the temperature is absolutely the factor for snow. Not precipitation amounts.

Which is why the Texas (and other areas) in February 2021 is a great example of why hand waving away snow with the idiocy of "warmer means more precipitation" can be shown easily, to be fraud, and a false claim.

[robinson]

When it comes to the oceans, sediment from ocean cores is evidence that is really hard to adjust

Some of our best info on past climate is from multiple cores

It verified the varves data, as well as other sources

https://eos.tufts.edu/varves/Geology/chronology.asp

Trees are also really good evidence of climate change

[robinson]

OK keep that Covid shit out of this topic!

[robinson]

THIS ..... IS ...... SCIENCE!

https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/up ... /sword.jpg

[robinson]

https://twitter.com/AlexEpstein/status/ ... 14464?s=20

[robinson]

The sea level data is one of the most damning pieces of evidence, that shows just how fraudulent some claims are.

Snowfall is another.

[robinson]

If you ever dive into the data regarding climate you will realize it’s exactly like that with climate science

You always say that but the dog keeps eating your homework.

Hahahaha, that made me chuckle, because the forum software actually ate all my graphs I posted.


viewtopic.php?p=1048152#p1048152

So now I can show the snow and temp data in a post

download/file.php?id=10773&t=1
download/file.php?id=10775&t=1

And to keep it simple for the quotes

download/file.php?id=10774&t=1
download/file.php?id=10776&t=1

I find that awesome. I know some find it annoying. I understand. I just don't care.

Image

Image

Once again we see that it's not a warming trend that ends up with a record snow dump

This theme will show up over and over and over (and it won't matter at all)

There is another "reasons" that will show up, and it's easy enough to debunk. It goes like this

"Because it is warmer there is more precipitation, so more snow"

If that were the case, I wouldn't even be arguing about this. But it's not the case.

Image

Now I have to post them elsewhere, then hotlink them here, and considering it won't make any difference to the woke, and the skeptics already suspect fraud, why bother?

[robinson]

However, fortune favors the procrastinator, because hard as it might be to believe, it looks like New England, including the Boston area, has once again delivered record snow and cold.

Even if it is shown, it literally won't matter

That's true, but the work is a reward unto itself.

The 2015 snow is shown in the Blue Hill climate station, station USC00190736
Map coordinates 42.2122 -71.1136

Looking at precipitation, temperature and snow depth, it's obvious the "explainings" used by alarmists are idiotic, if not fraudulent.

The idiots claim there is more precip because it's warmer, and that means more snow. It's not true.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0iufVuSZdCU/ ... 9_2015.png

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/i ... ghOw=s1051

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cVeVSPatskQ/ ... 9_2015.png

But based on over a decade of watching the woke or the delusional avoid this reality, one more example certainly isn't going to change anyone's mind.

[robinson]

Of course the same relationship shows up all over. Extreme cold leads to record snow, never the reverse. That some woke idiot tries to convince you the relationship is the other way around, this is on the same level as telling you a man is a woman, while the man walks around the girls locker room with a hard on.

[Pyrrho]

https://i.imgur.com/cnpkl4N.jpg

[robinson]

Well the data is in, and it shows once again that the huge amount of snow was not from "more precipitation", but from the fact that it was very cold. Which is exactly what basic meteorology teaches.

Understanding why this is the case is not even that hard, but experience has shown that when somebody doesn't want to understand something, it is literally impossible for them to do so. If they started out with a belief, which was not based on science, logic and reason, there is zero chance science, logic and reason is going to change their mind about something.

[robinson]

OK. What happened in Feb 2010?

Something in the world in general, or just the month the light-bulb in your head turned on? :roll:

In two days it will be 11 years since it actually started. December 19 2009. I didn't know it at the time. The climategate emails were out, but I wasn't that interested. Like a good skeptic I didn't need to actually look at anything to know what was what.

https://64.media.tumblr.com/ce711ef9758 ... o1_500.jpg

[robinson2]

The irony


Snow usually melts

[robinson]

Well since the bot basically didn't do shit, and even started unrelated topics, it's history. Dead, it's dead Jim.

Now, on with the data and the show.

[robinson]

But based on over a decade of watching the woke or the delusional avoid this reality, one more example certainly isn't going to change anyone's mind.

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/data_trap.png

[robinson]

After spending some small amount of time, almost every day for the lady 75 days, preparing data, I still find it not worth it

The new things I discovered while doing the work are reward enough