Fodder for climate deniers to gum up the works?

[fromderinside]

Concluding: Asked what he meant Dr. Bates showed thumbs up. Then they went into the theater to watch Shakespeare's "Much Ado about Nothing"

How an Interoffice Spat Erupted Into a Climate-Change Furor http://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/business/energy-environment/climate-change-dispute-john-bates.html

or

What to do about proper storing of data becomes deniers attachment to new hero Retired Dr. Bates, principal climate scientist, who didn't get the job the author got before the study was written.

Smoking gun? Youbetcha. More recently installed monitors on ships obviously provide less reliable data than do much earlier installed buoy recorders so the data has to be false.

Never trust one who has published a peer reviewed article - ever!!

Ready, set, comment*

*^{_{there will be nothing unless you read the article}}

 

[Valjean]

The evidence for global warming doesn't come from a single source or methodology. It's pretty well established across a dozen different disciplines.
Deniers, I think, are grasping at straws and seem to think global warming is some massive, worldwide conspiracy.

 

[repoman]

They have satellites that measure incoming and outgoing radiation and the difference is roughly equal to the rate of increase in thermal energy of the planet.

Case closed

 

[crispy]

They have satellites that measure incoming and outgoing radiation and the difference is roughly equal to the rate of increase in thermal energy of the planet.

Case closed

Probably the most easily understandable evidence to present to a denier ever. Although some deniers can be really good at being stupid. Once saw a guy who insisted that global warming had been disproven by climate change (could it get must more nonsensical?), because change implied that temperatures go up and down. And if they go down BOOM global warming disproven (oh yes it could!).

 

[fromderinside]

Z
Ah. Straws. Love them straws. Last one I loved so much was Hillary's unsecured server.

Oh wait, we have Trump in the WH. Gonna start throwing things at this screen now so I have to leave the room.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They have satellites that measure incoming and outgoing radiation and the difference is roughly equal to the rate of increase in thermal energy of the planet.

Case closed

The problem is there was a problem with some of the satellite measurements. Somebody forgot to account for orbital decay and the satellites were giving readings that were too low. When the mistake was identified they went back and fixed the data--and the deniers used that as an example of faking the data to support the conspiracy.

What they fail to understand is that no satellite can actually measure earth's temperature. Rather, they are looking at the energy coming off and using that to calculate the temperature--and one of the terms in that calculation is the distance between the sensor and the target. The result was numbers that were progressively lower than they should have been as the satellite got lower and lower. They were high enough up that the altitude loss was only of concern in interpreting the readings, they're not going to fall out of orbit like the stuff that's placed in a low orbit.