tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post416220126645200171..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: The HadSST error was an error and has been fixedSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-88228167523692490852016-04-17T07:52:42.717+10:002016-04-17T07:52:42.717+10:00> Why does Chris Philips handle point back
>...> Why does Chris Philips handle point back<br />> to the Pacific Maritime Magazine website?<br />Look at the caption on the video -- they have a "Dynamic Under Keel Clearance Project" working on making more navigable water between the bottom of their boats and the ocean floor.<br /><br />Bet they're counting on sea level rising? Hank Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521410755553979665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-74379471234273611582016-04-13T09:59:46.737+10:002016-04-13T09:59:46.737+10:00Millicent is right. There's always one niggly ...Millicent is right. There's always one niggly little point or another they have issue with, and then when they have been proven to be wrong on that point, they just move on to their next niggly little point. There's no accountability, no ownership taken about being wrong/trying to improve their... um... so-called skeptical abilities.metzomagichttp://metzomagic.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-70051620394184295352016-04-12T20:30:53.486+10:002016-04-12T20:30:53.486+10:00If climate change deniers want any claim they make...If climate change deniers want any claim they make to be taken seriously by the larger community then they need to cut all the crap that represents their daily activity. Thing is, that means they would all have been silent for the past five years or more.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-1302213762139631632016-04-12T19:56:45.927+10:002016-04-12T19:56:45.927+10:00Why does Chris Philips handle point back to the Pa...Why does Chris Philips handle point back to the Pacific Maritime Magazine website?<br /><br />Probably just another shill making up their monthly quota of posts.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-41469181457721202622016-04-12T19:21:30.437+10:002016-04-12T19:21:30.437+10:00Thanks, Nick.Thanks, Nick.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-2271938317119993222016-04-12T19:08:59.280+10:002016-04-12T19:08:59.280+10:00I've added some clarifications. Apparently the...I've added some clarifications. Apparently the temperatures were OK at all times. The numbers for coverage were listed in the opposite order in the grid, and this was reflected in the hemisphere files. Coverage numbers aren't used for any common purpose.<br /><br />John McLean added his own clarification <a href="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/25/friday-funny-more-upside-down-data/#comment-2177027" rel="nofollow">here</a>:<br /><i>"Try looking at the coverage from (a) the HadSST3-nh.dat file and (b) calculated from the gridded data. (I didn’t make it clear enough that coverage was the issue when I emailed Bishop Hill.)"</i><br />The parenthesis is an understatement.<br />Nick Stokeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06377413236983002873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-39504171481121707152016-04-12T17:14:07.728+10:002016-04-12T17:14:07.728+10:00Thanks, DavidR.
I've added an update which is...Thanks, DavidR.<br /><br />I've added <a href="http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/the-hadsst-error-was-error-and-has-been.html#update" rel="nofollow">an update</a> which is a comment by Nick Stokes. He points out what was corrected, as well as what was wrong with the original claim.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-49604191058408542572016-04-12T16:45:32.331+10:002016-04-12T16:45:32.331+10:00As it happens March 2016 HadSST3 figures have just...As it happens March 2016 HadSST3 figures have just been published: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/<br /><br />At 0.687, it's a new record warmest March. Temperatures were also up compared to February. <br /><br />I download these data most months and the only change this month from last is a slight increase in the February figure, up from 0.604 to 0.611. (It's not unusual for the previous month or couple of months' values to be changed slightly in any of the HadCRU data sets.)<br /><br />So while we have to credit John McClean for his hawk-eyed attention to detail, it appears that the error did not in any way affect the global picture in HadSST3.DavidRnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-89833752718834349482016-04-12T16:21:07.533+10:002016-04-12T16:21:07.533+10:00Can you be more specific Chris? Are you asking abo...Can you be more specific Chris? Are you asking about the greenhouse effect?<br /><br />About the only people who talk in blanket terms about "settled science" are the fake sceptics. Some science is settled, some is not, otherwise there'd not be any scientific research in any field.<br /><br />In climate science, the greenhouse effect was demonstrated more than 150 years ago and published in 1861. Modern thermodynamic theories evolved over time from the late 1700s. Fluid dynamics has a long history. The Navier-Stokes equations were formulated in the 1800s.<br /><br />The proof of climate science is in the evidence. The world is getting hotter, as expected.<br /><br />For comparison: In biology, genetic inheritance was documented shortly after Tyndall's 1861 paper on CO2. In regard to evolution, Darwin's On the Origin of Species was published in 1859. Almost 40 years later, in 1897 the electron was discovered, which led to a proposed model of the atom.<br /><br />So which part of "AGW" are you asking is "settled science"?Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-8976885560786704862016-04-12T15:12:48.563+10:002016-04-12T15:12:48.563+10:00AGW is clearly "settled" science. Can yo...AGW is clearly "settled" science. Can you prove it?Chris Philipshttp://www.pacmar.comnoreply@blogger.com