We got it! You know a couple of things for copy-pasting. What you fail all the time to do is connecting the dots between A and B as your post says nothing neither about the on-topic nor related to the message you quoted, as it looks just like an aged kid proposing: "why don't we join forces against him".
Because, like wikipedia it is an excellent secondary source that links to the original scientific papers. Even when linking to 'skeptic' sites and using quotes they are careful to provide links so that folks can see the comments in context, a habit sadly lacking in many 'skeptic' sites. When other sites start following the same principles, then they may get the same response.
Why do you base these thought experiments in such abtuse and inapproapriate terms, they make no sense because they don't apply to reality.
No. I assume a uniform blanket of insulation with the thermometer in the center. There are no convective currents of fluid and no direct penetration by solar radiation of the glass in the thermometer. A thermometer in the back yard would experience both a day/night cycle of solar radiation and convective heat transport by air.
There's a lot of that going around.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=907&pictureid=6638...
The same page in the blog links to some document in nsidc. The innumerate basis of negationism is always there, as the blog's author seem to have overlooked an opportunity to criticize "how science is made". Look at this snapshot searching for mistakes (two different kind of mistakes in a total of 8 occasions)
Government agencies must be more careful about what they publish.
Perhaps you two should argue.
No, there isn't. You simply didn't answer what was elemental to back your words and you are been massively reminded of that.
That's easy for you to control, because you'll be making the insulation blankets yourself out of newsprint or thin kitchen sponges or whatever. Just do your best to make them all the same.
You can eliminate convective heat transport by placing your insulated thermometers within a vacuum. (I'm not sure why you think that's so important, because the convective medium would be the same for both thermometers, but I don't pretend to understand the difficulties you pretend to see here.)
This particular discussion is with Halsu. So far it's been civil.
A thermometer on the Earth's surface is not at the center of the Earth (Duh!). A thermometer on the solid surface of the Earth experiences a 24-hour cycle induced by the rotation of the Earth (Duh!). Thermometers on the solid surface, even if enclosed in evacuated chambers, will experience the effects of convective heat transport.
Why do you think that's important, or even relevant?
You have already been told (by someone who has already run the experiment) that the effect you say you wish to understand will become clear within an hour of starting the experiment.
That convection will be negligible if you place your insulated thermometers within a vacuum. You would want to suspend them within the vacuum using thin supports of a good thermal insulator.
Why, when that happens on the earth (hint - Hadley and Ferrel cells)?
1. A sphere in orbit will experience a heat gain/loss cycle related to the period of rotation and revolution (no cycle at all of the rotation period equals the revolution period). Whatever the cycle, the center will be at a constant temperature if the body is spherical and uniform and the orbit is (nearly) circular. A thermometer on the surface of an airless body will experience the same cycle.
Crushing.
