ADVERTISEMENT

It is pure statistical garbage when we are told what the average global temperature is and that it is a heat record

OKSTATE1

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
May 29, 2001
44,664
55,499
113
Edmond, Oklahoma
July 10, 2023

It is pure statistical garbage when we are told what the average global temperature is and that it is a heat record​

By Jack Hellner



We are seeing daily scare stories that the Earth is setting record highs for average daily temperatures. These reports base their talking points on taking the average temperature from what appears to be around 11,000 weather stations, and it seems they just add those temperatures up and divide by 11,000.
Earth’s global mean temperature (GMT) is determined by averaging measurements of air temperatures over land ocean surface temperatures. Thousands of weather stations spread over land surface worldwide measure the local air temperatures while thousands of ships and buoys measure the local sea surface temperatures.
A mathematician or statistical analyst would tell these people that is not a proper way to calculate the average annual temperature of anything because the weather stations aren't divided evenly. A proper statistical way would be placing weather stations based on square miles of area.
For example:

The Earth covers around 197 million square miles and there are 11,000 weather stations.

7_238_9.gif
Siberia has 5.1 million square miles and only 59 weather stations when a proper statistical sample would be over 250 stations
Antarctica has 8.5 million square mile and only 57 weather stations when a proper statistical sample would require over 450 stations.

Why is there such an obvious underrepresentation in cold areas? Could it be the leftist agenda?

The 48 contiguous states in the U.S cover around 3.8 million square miles, which is only 2% of the Earth's area yet it appears we have 1,218 weather stations or over 10% of total stations. Why is the sample skewed so much?

There are very few weather stations covering the oceans despite over 70% of the Earth being covered by water. If the scientists actually wanted an average global temperature, over 7,000 of the temperature stations would be in or over the oceans, instead of just a few ships.

About 71 percent of the Earth's surface is water-covered, and the oceans hold about 96.5 percent of all Earth's water (source)
It is not generally realized that twelve ships, representing eight nations and acting as floating weather observation stations, are pinpointed over the 3,000 miles of rough water between North America and Europe.

It is statistically impossible to calculate an average daily global temperature and misleading to tell the public that they do that every day in order to scare them into capitulation to the green pushers.

It is blatantly misleading to pretend we can tell what the average temperature on Earth was 100 years ago or 125,000 years ago. There is also no way to tell what causes temperatures to fall or rise, which they have done many times throughout history.

The climate is fluctuating and has always fluctuated cyclically and naturally. It is arrogant to believe politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity if we allow them to destroy industries that have greatly improved our quality and length of life.

On a side note: In Springfield, Illinois, where I live, the warmest day ever was July 14, 1954, during a global cooling period. This year we will be about 30 degrees cooler than 69 years ago. I guess our coal fired power plant hasn't killed us.

These records were observed at Springfield's Abraham Lincoln Capital Airport and go back to 1901. The highest temperature measured during that time was 112 degrees Fahrenheit (44 Celsius) on July 14, 1954
 
It's July 10, and the Northwest Passage is still closed due to Arctic Ice.

Cmon man…when you spout stupid sh!t a 5-second google coukd refute, that’s basically giving up and conceding defeat already lol



carry on
 

Cmon man…when you spout stupid sh!t a 5-second google coukd refute, that’s basically giving up and conceding defeat already lol



carry on

Here you go...
https://www.canada.ca/en/environmen...onditions/concentration-map-last-10-days.html

Your article is about a section of the NW Passage. They also have to take snowmobiles and sleds. You proberly need to check out a map.
 
Last edited:

Cmon man…when you spout stupid sh!t a 5-second google coukd refute, that’s basically giving up and conceding defeat already lol



carry on
"If they can get through Bellot Strait — despite climate change, it is still impassible some summers — they have a decent chance of success."

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
It is blatantly misleading to pretend we can tell what the average temperature on Earth was 100 years ago or 125,000 years ago.

The liberal dumbshytes reported on the news tonight that 6,500 year old temperature records are being broken around the world. Good Lord, how stupid are these people, and the gullible slow who believe it?
 
Last edited:
The liberal dumbshytes reported on the news tonight that 6,500 year old temperature records are being broken around the world. Good Lord, how stupid are these people, and the gullible slow who believe it?
Our temps in the CenTex are slightly milder than last summer. A TV reporter yesterday raved about ERCOT setting an all time record power use demand. The reporter didn't bother to mention the uptick in Texas population over last year.
 
I'm actually optimistic that we are on our way to fixing these problems despite yore best efforts. We are late, and there will be pain along the way, but the outlook is generally improving IMO. Sorry to disappoint you.
I just watched an interview with the CEO of Chevron and he made a very interesting observation. He said 20 years ago, fossil fuels were responsible for 84% of all of our energy needs. Here we are 20 years later and they are still responsible for 80% of all our needs! So, if you are anti-fossil fuels then you are going to be miserable for decades to come. The demand for them will rise every year for the foreseeable future. THAT is the simple reality until we adopt nuclear energy to power the grid. And even then, fossil fuels will still be the lifeblood of the worlds economy. There's so much more to oil than just generating electricity and powering our automobiles.
 
I just watched an interview with the CEO of Chevron and he made a very interesting observation. He said 20 years ago, fossil fuels were responsible for 84% of all of our energy needs. Here we are 20 years later and they are still responsible for 80% of all our needs! So, if you are anti-fossil fuels then you are going to be miserable for decades to come. The demand for them will rise every year for the foreseeable future. THAT is the simple reality until we adopt nuclear energy to power the grid. And even then, fossil fuels will still be the lifeblood of the worlds economy.
Is it your expectation that the world will ever be completely off hydrocarbon-based fuels?
 
Is it your expectation that the world will ever be completely off hydrocarbon-based fuels?
No. Unless there's some new technological breakthrough (and that's always possible) then certainly not in our lifetime. Just read all the forecast from all these energy and pipeline companies about future oil demand. It rises every year for decades as far as they can predict. There's simply no replacement for fossil fuels. Wind, solar and EV's won't solve the problem and they actually introduce different problems.
 
Is it your expectation that the world will ever be completely off hydrocarbon-based fuels?
I don't believe we will ever completely do away with hydrocarbon products. However, there will be a time when it will no longer be required as a primary fuel source but we are still years away from adequately replacing hydrocarbon fuels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
BTW, Phoenix gets hot in the summer, but it’s a dry heat.

Friend of mine in So. Cal. had a golf outing at Palm Desert as his bachelor party. One of the days we played, Palm was the hottest place in the country, around 118 as I recall. I darned sure don't remember anything "dry" about that heat! :eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: iasooner2000
I don't believe we will ever completely do away with hydrocarbon products. However, there will be a time when it will no longer be required as a primary fuel source but we are still years away from adequately replacing hydrocarbon fuels.
We’re not years away. Unless there’s a major breakthrough, we are decades away. But in the meantime, we’ll be perfectly fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skylinepoke
I don't believe we will ever completely do away with hydrocarbon products. However, there will be a time when it will no longer be required as a primary fuel source but we are still years away from adequately replacing hydrocarbon fuels.
How very reasonable of you. Congratulations. I am proud of you.
 
No. Unless there's some new technological breakthrough (and that's always possible) then certainly not in our lifetime. Just read all the forecast from all these energy and pipeline companies about future oil demand. It rises every year for decades as far as they can predict. There's simply no replacement for fossil fuels. Wind, solar and EV's won't solve the problem and they actually introduce different problems.
Can you share one of those sources?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT