Of polar caps and climate change

We've discussed this.

Eyeballing it isn't how science works. Your methodology is a millennium or two behind modern science.


LOL!!!

There is no ocean rise.

Because there is no ongoing net ice melt either...

Because Earth has not warmed at all recently.
 
Because of a picture you saw, right? Lol


What is your "evidence" of ocean rise?

Answer -= a taxpayer funded color FUDGE chart....


because the "ocean rise" is "invisible," only the "top climate scientists" can see it...
 
What is your "evidence" of ocean rise?

Answer -= a taxpayer funded color FUDGE chart....


because the "ocean rise" is "invisible," only the "top climate scientists" can see it...
Science isn't a sham just because you lack the neurons to understand it.
 
Last edited:
Science isn't a shame just because you lack the neurons to understand it.


Science is based on theory and data. Your "theory" is that increasing atmospheric CO2 causes warming. Your side has NO ACTUAL EVIDENCE to back that up, just FUDGE.


Actual satellite and balloon data - NO WARMING in ATMOSPHERE
Surface Air Pressure = NO WARMING in ATMOSPHERE
 
Science is based on theory and data. Your "theory" is that increasing atmospheric CO2 causes warming. Your side has NO ACTUAL EVIDENCE to back that up, just FUDGE.


Actual satellite and balloon data - NO WARMING in ATMOSPHERE
Surface Air Pressure = NO WARMING in ATMOSPHERE
You call every shred of evidence that contradicts you fudge. You've made your thinking circular and unfalsifiable.
 
You call every shred of evidence that contradicts you fudge



There is a difference between DATA and FUDGE.

Data comes from INSTRUMENTS.

Fudge comes when the DATA refutes CO2 FRAUD and hence CO2 FRAUD fudges data to "fit the narrative..."





"satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling."



Translation - the ACTUAL DATA from satellites and balloons, more than three decades worth that was highly correlated, 100% refutes CO2 FRAUD....





"Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data."


Classic. The ACTUAL DATA shows no warming, and the two data sources are highly correlated. Accept the data and declare CO2 FRAUD dead, or FUDGE THE DATA and keep lying about it....
 
There is a difference between DATA and FUDGE.

Data comes from INSTRUMENTS.

Fudge comes when the DATA refutes CO2 FRAUD and hence CO2 FRAUD fudges data to "fit the narrative..."





"satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling."



Translation - the ACTUAL DATA from satellites and balloons, more than three decades worth that was highly correlated, 100% refutes CO2 FRAUD....





"Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data."


Classic. The ACTUAL DATA shows no warming, and the two data sources are highly correlated. Accept the data and declare CO2 FRAUD dead, or FUDGE THE DATA and keep lying about it....
You're really not worth more of my actual effort. I've explained all of this to you, in detail, multiple times. You don't listen because the complexity isn't accessible to your mind. So you commit to circular reasoning and call everything a lie.
 
  • Fake News
Reactions: EMH
Back
Top Bottom