On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:51:22 -0400, "Cat_in_awe"
wrote:

Roger Coppock wrote:
On Oct 28, 3:06 am, "I M @ good guy" wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:21:33 -0700 (PDT), Roger Coppock

wrote:
WARMEST SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE SEPTEMBER IN 130 YEARS OF NASA DATA!
It's 2.4 SIGMA above the mean Southern Hemisphere September
and 1.5 SIGMA above the 130-year linear trend.

In the real world,
outside the fossil fuel industry's spin and lies,
global mean surface temperatures continue to rise.
Please see:

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporat...20080923c.html

Yes, HA HA, it was 0.03 degrees warmer than 1882,
is that a typo, or a joke, as if a thermometer in 1882 could
be read within one whole degree.

Yet another fossil fool failure with a reading comprehension
problem. Read again, Mr. Guy, the data are the means of
multiple thermometers.


And there is zero justification for reporting those temperatures to two
decimal places. When the raw data is accurate to a degree, (or possibly 0.5
degree), reporting in the hundredths is falsifying the accuracy of the data.
I think you need to take an introductory lesson in statistics.


Nah, woger is sure that 5,000 sleepy people
guessing at how cold it got before they got up,
can be accurate to two decimal points if they
are all averaged together.

Statistically some will guess high and some
will guess low, so it all evens out.