Probably the best single source for the science of global warming is Skeptical Science. Skeptical Science is maintained by John Cook. "Cook is trained as a solar physicist and says he is motivated by his Christian beliefs.[19] He is one of a number of Christians publicly arguing for scientific findings on anthropogenic global warming, and is an evangelical Christian.[20]"
Of course jerm isn't really a good Christian at all. Christians don't knowingly lie. If there is a hell....
The deniers have this "Steve Goddard" who is so ashamed he doesn't use his real name and he chose one to confuse it with the Goddard Space Center. A real science source.
I am not going to judge Cook's eternal propects... but I note even satan himself would claim to be a good Christian if it could fool people to the dark side. most thinking people notice you judge a man by his deeds not his words. note... I have do not ever recall claiming to be a good Christian here on ET or anywhere else. making the claim means does not really mean much. I have heard assistant pastors talk about the male predators showing up at their functions proclaiming to be Christian just to prey upon trusting single women.
Thanks for the Google idea. The below link has an article by Judith Curry. It has links to everything you could ever want to know about the data tampering including articles that argue against Goddard's analysis. But, it is much worse than I thought it was. Are you aware that the USHCN data set includes estimates when they have real numbers but did not include them? It is much worse than you think if the information is correct in the article. Correction: Below is a quote from an email written by Paul Homewood received by Judith Curry. According to him he has verified it. Juddith Curry's conclusion: http://judithcurry.com/2014/06/28/skeptical-of-skeptics-is-steve-goddard-right/ ADD: Below is a link to the article by Paul Homewood that after a cursory review looks like he has posted all of the data. http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.word...sive-temperature-adjustments-at-luling-texas/
Judith Curry? LOL While Judith Curry supports the scientific opinion on climate change,[12] she has argued that climatologists should be more accommodating of those skeptical of the scientific consensus on climate change.[12] Favourite climate myths by Judith Curry Below are many of the climate myths used by Judith Curry plus how often each myth has been used. Climate myths by Curry What the Science Says Usage "Global warming stopped in 1998, 1995, 2002, 2007, 2010, ????" Global temperature is still rising and 2010 was the hottest recorded. "Scientists tried to 'hide the decline' in global temperature" The 'decline' refers to a decline in northern tree-rings, not global temperature, and is openly discussed in papers and the IPCC reports. "IPCC is alarmist" Numerous papers have documented how IPCC predictions are more likely to underestimate the climate response. "There is no consensus" 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming. Who are you idiots going to dredge up next? Bozo ? Salby? LOL
All you come back with is drivel and character assassination. The math is right there in the link above. You can't do some simple math. Nah, all you know how to do is regurgitation. Prof Judith Curry chairs the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Americaâs prestigious Georgia Institute of Technology Also, she is the co-author of many of your highly touted peer-reviewed articles at Berkeley Earth. http://berkeleyearth.org/whats-new Are you a sandwich maker? You look like a sandwich maker. NOW, go make me a sandwich. I like turkey.
Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a self-employed cartoonist, John Cook (who apparently pretends to be a Nazi). It is moderated by zealots who ruthlessly censor any and all form of dissent from their alarmist position. This way they can pretend to win arguments, when in reality they have all been refuted. The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to be childishly taunted and censored, while Dr. Michaels has been dishonestly quoted and smeared. The irony of the site's oxymoronic name "Skeptical Science" is that the site is not skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions. John Cook is now desperately trying to cover up his background that he was employed as a cartoonist for over a decade with no prior employment history in academia or climate science. Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website originally said, "I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist" - John Cook, Skeptical Science http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html