• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Perspectives on Temperature

Feel free to post an explanation.

I'm not making the fraud accusation and therefore feel no need to do your homework for you. I suggest you contact the people responsible for the data you are criticizing directly.
 
I'm not making the fraud accusation and therefore feel no need to do your homework for you. I suggest you contact the people responsible for the data you are criticizing directly.

I'm satisfied with the answer I have.
 
I'm satisfied with the answer I have.

I'm aware. As I previously said, you just took that guy's word for it. You've accepted what you were told, and are satisfied with the lack of evidence.
 
I'm aware. As I previously said, you just took that guy's word for it. You've accepted what you were told, and are satisfied with the lack of evidence.

I think the evidence was presented.
 
At some point all the thermometers need to be calibrated to a standard.

They are, but the accuracy depends on the type. A thermocouple is not very accurate compared to other types of sensors, but for general use is good enough. And, as has been pointed out, the deviation from normal is more important that the absolute reading.
Trending is very important when you don't want your nuclear reactor to exceed design parameters. I have been a Reactor Operator, I&C Tech, and Metrology Tech. And anything that is worth measuring is often being over designed. Really, anything more accurate than 0.1% is overkill.
Bear in mind, ALL of our nuclear power plants were designed using a slip-stick.....
 
Paradox. Either 47 terrawatts of heat are conducted or they aren't. Which is it, dude?

Actually, they talk of 'trapping' heat. Something that is not possible.

Heat isn't temperature. Heat is measured in watts. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. Both NOAA and NASA claim to publish graphs of global temperatures. They're manufactured data.

We don't know the temperature of the surface of the Sun. We only have a general idea, say to within 100K deg F or so.

We don't know the temperature of the Earth. The temperatures across Earth's surface vary widely.

Heat is measured in watts?
 
Baserate fallacy. You can't measure a change without measuring an absolute value first.

If you can't establish a true absolute, you make up a number that fits.....and publish it so all readings can be compared to something instead of a fleeting number that is hanging off a butterfly's butt.
 
Math error. You can't use a statistical output as its own input. You can't use a statistical output to adjust any other statistical input. No statistical analysis can affected by other that may be been run. Outputs are not inputs. Outputs are not data. They are summaries.

Which is one of the reasons why climate 'scientists' deny mathematics, just like you do.

WRONG. Is the anomaly due to a stuck gauge? A communications fault? It might all be real data, and it's ALL significant. You can't just throw it out any piece of data BEFORE you select data for analysis. Math error. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize against paired randR. Failure to calculate margin of error. Failure to use raw data.
Raw data is that which gives many scientists job security. I worked for a year on a project related to instrument failures, or causes thereof.
We got an attaboy from the big boss, and the government agency funding it. Then the boss said, "bearing in mind that much of our data was made up....
 
They are, but the accuracy depends on the type. A thermocouple is not very accurate compared to other types of sensors, but for general use is good enough. And, as has been pointed out, the deviation from normal is more important that the absolute reading.
Trending is very important when you don't want your nuclear reactor to exceed design parameters. I have been a Reactor Operator, I&C Tech, and Metrology Tech. And anything that is worth measuring is often being over designed. Really, anything more accurate than 0.1% is overkill.
Bear in mind, ALL of our nuclear power plants were designed using a slip-stick.....

Slip Stick?

Is that another term for slide rule
 
So the BTU is still around? Thank goodness, I was about to trash my physics books.

BTUs are still used. I believe it's the energy required to increase 1 pound of water by 1 degree F, but I'm hesitant to say with certainty without verifying. I believe it is still commonly used for US home heating and cooling. Maybe the UK too. But almost everything for science has gone metric. A calorie in the metric unit, to raise one gram of water by one degree C. Kilo-Calorie for for one kilogram of water.
 
Bear in mind, ALL of our nuclear power plants were designed using a slip-stick.....

So was the nuclear bomb, the moon landing, and other old marvels of technology.
 
Yes, and limited to ~3 significant figures.
The same technology put a lot of planes in the air.

Never had to use one, training on them was stopped about 10 years before I would have had to use them. Instead we had instruction on the graphing calculators
 
Never had to use one, training on them was stopped about 10 years before I would have had to use them. Instead we had instruction on the graphing calculators
Yea, the TI-30 calculator came out just before I started and displaced slid rulers, but
someone kept a lecture about how to use one in his class.
 
I never had use for mine, but I consider it a family heirloom.
 
Back
Top Bottom