3 ms·
Is this a regurgitation of David Rose's critique? [edit: this "debate" confuses me, is there a summary/reference somewhere?]
by clarkevans 10y ago
Is this a regurgitation of David Rose's critique?
[edit: this "debate" confuses me, is there a summary/reference somewhere?]
- sharemywin 10y agoFound a reference for your comment: What [Rose] fails to mention is that the new NOAA results have been validated by independent data from satellites, buoys and Argo floats and that many other independent groups, including Berkeley Earth and the UK’s Met Office Hadley Centre, get effectively the same results. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/2/5/1630229/-Retired-NOAA-scientist-feels-slighted-sets-world-afire-in-revenge http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/2/5/1630229/-Retired-NOAA...
- anon1385 10y agoIt's a regurgitation of the Mail on Sunday's latest nonsense. The MoS article did at least provide some humour by 'proving' misconduct by using a doctored graph: https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin/status/828082851585388544 https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin/status/828082851585388544 It's funny how David Rose continues to get baselines wrong despite it being explained to him hundreds of times. Even more strange is how his 'inadvertent' baseline errors always end up supporting his latest wacky conspiracy theory…