On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 07:34:56 -0700, Tom Kunich wrote:


The temperature datasets going back to 1880 are entirely ground based
national weather stations using mercury thermometers that have automatic
setting high and low temperature readings. The Satellite data is only
available since 1978 and at this point their records are insufficient to
reach any conclusions as to any climate variations. 40 years is FAR too
short a time to reflect data on climate.

I'm still waiting on some sort of explanations on how actual datasets on
temperatures have "variability".

You've been pointed to it. you jst have to use your intellect to phrase a
web search to find an excellent paper on the web.


We have these things called "microclimates" such as there are a 20
degree temperature variations around the bay area which comprises a sea
shore with very cold sea water (though the temperature changes
cyclically depending on El Nino or La Nina events), around the bay with
a large body of water that regulates the temperature of most of the
major bay area cities and the "inland" which includes places like Santa
Rosa, Fairfield, Concord, Livermore and Gilroy. These areas are far
enough away from the moderating effects of the bay that they are hotter.

Perhaps you can defind the Earth's microclimate

Yet we simply average these temperatures over the area vs the
temperature and this is backed up with the satellite data so that we
know that we are achieving the proper averaging techniques.

In the bay area we are have good temperature records. LA is another
story and they now require the satellite data because the National
Weather Stations are often mishandled. They even had a picture of one of
the stations directly in the path of the exhaust from a building air
conditioner.

Weather predicting is a science and climate "science" is predicting long
term variations in the weather conditions. The problem is that a man
sitting in an office and using the Milankovitch Cycles and the Solar
Cycle information is as accurate as any other way of predicting
"climate" whereas they have been attempting for three decades to use
computer models and these models have been total failures.

You seem to have found a correlation that no one else hase. The
correlation is shattering. Hint, block of steel under a heat lamp
displays the same basic dimensions

If you want to discuss the finer details I can do that. But CO2 has no
effect and we have known that since a 1915 paper by the forerunner of
NOAA.
Yep, the 'science' of those days was tip top. Was that before or after
the "germ theory of disease" became widely accepted?

"The ONLY thing that has effects are the applied emissions by the
Sun which are controlled by the Milankovitch Cycles and the Solar Cycles
which if memory serves both can in general change the applied radiation
by only a half percent - and the density of the atmosphere which is
fixed.

So the data measurement controls the sum which is interm is controlled by
it's are? So the problems we are using the wrong measurement? surely
someone's got the cat by the tail now after a centry of measurement?

The long and the short is that there is no
But so many people say YES and they have better science. Your Model T
science just doesn't hold a candle to a Lamboghini, etc. Personally I
prefer bicycles.

and cannot be any man-made climate change.
Well, the space station has one and it relies heaviy of what is happening
on the planet.

What's more the climate appears to have passed its peak
Interglacial Period temperature and is on the way down. This is also
suggested by the Ice Core research by the Russians at Vostok,
Antarctica, Siberia, Russia and the American papers from Alaska.

Maybe, but that isn't what we are discussing. In fact it doesn't matter
wheather you're getting fried by extreme high temperatures or blasted by
icy winds, as both are non-conducise to human life.

Sticky your head out of the door to see wheather you wear furs and shoe
shoes, or hat, sunscreen and light cotons and carry gllons of water each
day is a not daily choice I desire. Places for a months holiday, then
yes, but not daily.