Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Now you're just trolling openly, so buh-bye.If your reaction to anyone questioning your scientific beliefs is ...
View attachment 801751
Then, it's safe to say, that it's not really about the science.
As you didn't even look at my link about proxies, you clearly have no actual interest in that topic.
No sealioning allowed.In fact, I'm interested in what YOU know.
So wait. You’re not going to share with the class how reliable proxy data is, then?This one, out of ideas and desperate, resorts to the tried and true "Just make some shit up" denier tactic.
And here, we have a "DERP! IT WUZ HOT ONE DAY, SO GLOBAL WAEMING IS A HOAX" argument.I remember when I was in high school, it got up to almost 120 for several days in a row one summer!!!!
And here, we have a "DERP! IT WUZ HOT ONE DAY, SO GLOBAL WAEMING IS A HOAX" argument.
The denier trolls are putting forth their full arsenal of dimwitted deflection today.
Again, we have one trying to pretend that "Hottest global average in recorded history" is just weather."Weather isn't climate!".....Until it is.
That's not the topic, troll.
Address the topic, or get off the thread.
And again, no sealioning. There's no liar more contemptible than the sealion.
![]()
![]()
The 96% of corrupted data was produced by a Senior Fellow on weather and climate, and the study identified that 96% of temperature stations in the United States don't meet NOAA's own standards for placement .. I will trust a Senior Fellow on weather and climate over an anonymous Internet personality on a political discussion forum.You're not making any sense.
I'm pointing out that the 4% agrees spot on with the 96%, which makes claims that the 96% is wrong look cuckoo.
Not one of them will discuss the cause of the current fast warming.
The temperature record says the opposite.We have yet to establish that fast warming, current or otherwise, is actually happening.
The temperature record says the opposite.
If you're going to simply deny hard data, there's no point in having a discussion with you. You're literally in the same category as a flat earther.
That doesn't change the simple fact that those "bad" stations give the same results as the pristine stations, which debunks your theory that warming is due to bad stations.The 96% of corrupted data was produced by a Senior Fellow on weather and climate, and the study identified that 96% of temperature stations in the United States don't meet NOAA's own standards for placement ..