UK station rebuked on climate film

rs is

Originally Posted by gc:
We are talking about contemporary climate change, and so my offer of a wager relates to Mars today, not a zillion years ago, or whatever.

There is no life on Mars.

Anybody want to take a bet on me being proved wrong in the next, shall we say, 5 years?

5 years is nowhere near enough time after all Mars has the same land surface area as The Earth

Mars

we haven't explored all of The Earth yet and how long have we been here?

If there is life and I think there is it will be microscopic so we have no chance of seeing Dejah Thoris of Barsoom and until we, as humanity, decide that having all our eggs in basket is mad and set about terraforming it no Podkayne of Mars either

[Rep]

Originally Posted by g hall:
How do you know who the target audience is

By simply reading the article.

Originally Posted by g hall:
and what proportion of the audience work in C as opposed to F ?

I didn't claim to know that.

Originally Posted by g hall:
Please give me 10% of your earnings then

To the same degree of resolution or, if you like, to one decimal place, both results are the same. Even if you take it to two decimal places and apply the tolerance given in your link, the results are the same.

Originally Posted by g hall:
The fact is that life is quite adaptable to variations of temperature as well as other factors, even though some species die out

No argument with that.

Originally Posted by g hall:
Glad you found it interesting I'll see what else I can dig up

Maybe something that is rather more significant than seven orders of magnitude less than current per century rate of change?

[Rep]

g hall wrote:-

Originally Posted by :
Is this clear enough any change in temperature whether up or down will always appear more dramatic if degrees F are used rather then degrees C

Maybe, -but you didn't say that in the original post.

I interpreted your comments, as possibly others did, as an attempt to denigrate the NOAA scientists who wrote the article for using F instead of your presumed popular favourite C. Therefore, criticising an insignificant part of the 'story' is a first step technique, (particularly of contrarians), to imply that the whole of the 'story' is faulted.

Anyway, you were also wrong because they gave both temperatures.

Attention to detail isn't your strong point I would suggest.

[Rep]

Originally Posted by Clippo:
g hall wrote:-

Maybe, -but you didn't say that in the original post.

I interpreted your comments, as possibly others did, as an attempt to denigrate the NOAA scientists who wrote the article for using F instead of your presumed popular favourite C. Therefore, criticising an insignificant part of the 'story' is a first step technique, (particularly of contrarians), to imply that the whole of the 'story' is faulted.

Anyway, you were also wrong because they gave both temperatures.

Attention to detail isn't your strong point I would suggest.

Actually what I was doing was questioning how "scientific" the site was by using degrees F was, after all Clippo you are the one who maintains we should use correct scientific sites.

My reasons were
1. We agree using degrees F as opposed to degrees C makes a change appear more dramatic

2. By doing a random search I found that the overwhelming number of sites involved in weather forecasting used degrees C

I'm sorry if this as not immediately clear it's my fault for forgetting that some people cannot keep up

[Rep]

From Temperature - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by :
Temperature is measured with thermometers that may be calibrated to a variety of temperature scales. In most of the world (except for the United States, and a few other countries), the degree Celsius scale is used for most temperature measuring purposes. The entire scientific world (the U.S. included) measures temperature using the Celsius scale and thermodynamic temperature using the kelvin scale, which is just the Celsius scale shifted downwards so that 0 K[1]= −273.15 °C, or absolute zero. Many engineering fields in the U.S., especially high-tech ones, also use the kelvin and degrees Celsius scales. However, the United States is the last major country in which the degree Fahrenheit temperature scale is used by most lay people, industry, popular meteorology, and government. Other engineering fields in the U.S. also rely upon the Rankine scale (a shifted Fahrenheit scale) when working in thermodynamic-related disciplines such as combustion. My bold

In post #56, I wrote:-

Originally Posted by :
Also, this (site) is American - even in some scientific circles they don't use 'grams' or ‘litres’ or ‘kilometers’

In post#65 Besoeker wrote:-

Originally Posted by :
Consider also, the source and the non-scientifc target audience many of whom would have little concept of temperatures in ºC.

So your attempt to discredit this source has quite fallen flat :-) :-) :-) :-)
I rest my case :-)

[Rep]