Originally Posted by Taskiss
Hey, you said the author acknowledged there were errors, I posted a current graph from his web site, so... well, I guess that you just refuse to acknowledge a peer reviewed bit o' science, eh?
NOW, if your credentials can match his, they you got something...or even get a link to someone who has his background in satellite monitoring work... but I'm thinking all you can do is trot out folks that disagree in writing, not with data.
So, how 'bout YOU show a graph of global temps over the last decade, from someone with credits equal to Spencers? Put your graphs where you mouth is. Oh, and I don't think youtube is peer reviewed, and I don't open those links just 'cause they're 99.99% garbage. Try something from a college or some .gov site.
There are three; GISS, HadCRUT3, and RSS. UAH was the outlier
until their 2005 revision brought their synthesis within the range of the other three.
Note RSS synthesis uses the same data sets that UAH is using, and RSS has always followed much more closely the GISS and HadCRUT3 data sets from the get go.
The real funny part here is that the UAH data synthesis has itself changed over time irrespective of new data, and these changes have tended TOWARDS
the GISS, RSS and HadCRUT3 data sets.
The last major revision occured in 2005, between 5.1 and 5.2 of the UAH synthesis.
On another note, the data with the least squares curve fitting is a 4th order (quintic) polynomial
. This is a full 3 orders higher then even UAH people state, no one ever does a higher order polynomial fitting, not good science or statistics for that matter, all fittings that I have ever seen are either linear or moving average as reported in the scientific literature.
Also if you download this dataset, plot the NoPo (North Pole 70-90N latitudes inclusive) (and the SoPo data sets if you wish, the SoPO shows little change) time series, this shows a temperature trend 3.5X greater than the global trend (from 0.125 C/decade globally to 0.438 C/decade for the North Pole).