In response to:

# Liberals Have All The Answers, But Their Answers Aren't Actually True

John You are absolutely correct. There is no way we can calculate an average global temperature. A statistically huge number of points would have to be monitored to be close to accurate. Like "relative bearing" where the direction to port or starboard is measured in degrees relative to the direction the ship is heading, the only way to accurately to determine if there is any change in the global "average" temperature is to use a large set of points, not effected by human development, over a long time period. BUT, an attempt is already in progress to provide relatively consistent data and it shows no statistical deviation in the planets temperature for the last 19 years. Funny about that.
Mike28 Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 2:01 PM
since I don't give a rat's patootie what the temps are at the N pole or the S pole or any other god-forsaken location, why not just take the temps of all the major population areas (cities) and average them. Since all that brick and mortar and concrete and paving should hold heat we should see a gradual increase in avg temps as the cities grew. Betcha the temps don't show that.
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Jan 20, 2013 3:00 PM
Actually, the climate scientists DO account for "heat islands" due to what you're talking about. The problem is (as Michael Crichton pointed out quite well in State of Fear) is that they're not sure exactly how much of an adjustment to make in their data. Putting adjusted data into climate models is skewing the data from the start. Are they adjusting the temps in heat islands down too much, not enough, or just right? They don't know.

## Liberals Have All The Answers, But Their Answers Aren't Actually True

Moonbat Exterminator wrote: JR, your assertion that computing a single number for the average temperature of the planet is mathematically impossible is incorrect. It would in fact be a simple, straightforward calculation. In statistics, it's called the mean of sampling means. The weakness of such a statistic is that the enormous variability in the data far exceeds the variability in that number. Even the 90 % confidence interval would be much larger than the variations in that average, making it useless from a practical standpoint. - Al Gore Warming

Dear Moon,

I think we are talking about two different things,...