It may be petty of me, but I enjoy highlighting the stupid things my critics say. Today’s critic goes by the name WebHubTelescope. If you’ve spent any time at Judith Curry’s blog, you know who he is. If you don’t, that’s fine. Suffice to say he’s egotistical, obnoxious and doesn’t like me. Well, also, he’s an idiot.
Over at Curry’s blog, WebHubTelescope condemned my recent post highlighting a problem with the Berkeley Earth temperature record (BEST) in very strident terms, such as:
it is looking more and more like you are intent in turning your analysis goof into a fabrication of results and use that to smear the BEST team.
Listen carefully Brandon. This is not that hard. Just take the data and make a graph correctly. That was your obvious mistake. You did not do it correctly.
To justify his criticism, WebHubTelescope offers this graph:
As an alternative to the comparison I made in my previous post:
You’ll note, his graph specifies the location for which the temperatures were measured: Springfield, Illinois. Mine doesn’t. Mine doesn’t because my graphs don’t show temperatures measured for Springfield, Illinois. As I said in that post:
I recently looked at the gridded data BEST published showing its estimates of average, monthly temperatures across the globe (available on this page). After some playing around, I decided to extract the values given for the area I live. I then did the same thing with another temperature record, NASA’s GISS (available on this page).
Note, this clearly says “gridded data.” There are also links to the pages where that gridded data could be found. There can be no question I was talking about gridded data. That is, there can be no question I was talking about temperature estimates for latitude-longitude grids on the world map.
One data set I used 1º x 1º grids. The other used 2º x 2º. As I said in my post, they “aren’t completely comparable as… GISS also uses larger grid sizes.” Again, there can be no mistaking what kind of data I used. I used data provided by two groups (GISS and BEST) representing their estimates for temperatures in my area.
To make the problem more clear, look at this map of Illinois:
See those boxes? Each one of those is a 1º x 1º square. Make a square out of four of them, and you have a 2º x 2º square. You’ll note, whether you use a 1º x 1º or 2º x 2º square, there are still a number of cities listed in it. Those squares would also cover many more towns not listed on the map.
WebHubTelescope used the temperatures measured in a single city (Springfield) for his GISS data. I used the estimated temperatures for a 2º x 2º grid, which covers 20+ cities, for my GISS data. There is no way anyone who sought to understand my post could fail to note the difference.
In other words, I made one comparison. WebHubTelescope made a very different comparison, and when it didn’t match the one I showed, he started suggesting I’m an idiot, a fraud, an “F-student” and more.
In reality, I just know how to read simple sentences.