GAT_00: The last time there was a global month of below average temperatures was February 1985. Everyone born after that month has never experienced a month of below average global temperatures.The odds of that happening, no matter how you define it, while assuming that there has been no increase from the 20th century temperature average, are so far beyond possible that absurd doesn't even begin to describe someone claiming it. There is no legitimate evidence that the planet is not warming. 332 months in a row of above average temperatures? It is utterly impossible for that to happen if global temperatures were not increasing.
brantgoose: [debunks stupid misleading shiat]
HotIgneous Intruder: jack21221: 2) The area of the Earth covered by contrails is tiny and is not nearly enough to change the albedo of the Earth by any meaningful amount.Contrails do affect temperature.
dennysgod: We need to stop focusing on carbon dioxide and focus on the most abundant and most effective greenhouse gas, dihydrogen monoxide.
david_gaithersburg: Notice how the term "global warming" was tossed once it was debunked?
Metalithic: Does no-one else find it odd that Libertarians and Conservatives are so fond of championing individual agency and blaming all misfortunes on personal choices, yet refuse to believe that our collective choices might have any negative effect on our environment?
Kriggerel: What I find so very telling is how the language describing those, who question the Global Warming orthodoxy has shifted over the past number of months.I specifically refer to the way that the phrase "Climate Change Skeptic" has been replaced by "Climate Change Denier", as denier always has the negative cachet associated with "Holocaust Denier".Of course, there's some real double-down irony in that, seeing has how vaguely-cloaked anti-semitism has once again become extremely chic in intellectual circles, and holocaust denial is once again rearing its head and sniffing around, especially in the "Israeli Apartheid Week" circles.
NobleHam: look at the actual Ljungqvist or Mann papers
NobleHam: Cyclometh: NobleHam: log_jammin: david_gaithersburg: Nah, I'll stick with scientific research instead of a 20 freaking minute Youtube clip. But thanks for sticking your head in the sand.your graph isn't "scientific research". it's just another doctored graph from a blogger.Your video ignores the predominance of ocean in the Southern Hemisphere and is overly reliant on data based on the cold land of the well-documented Northern Hemisphere without proper adjustment to account for the disparity. The data in the video is also presented somewhat dishonestly, with the video creator criticizing one person for removing the last 10 years from a 2000 year graph, but not pointing out that 10 year+ spikes above current temperatures are visible in the graph he cites. And finally he concludes by saying, "yeah, what's happening now is pretty much like the Medieval Warm Period... but that's not a good thing!Do you honestly think that this claptrap is going to fly? This isn't reddit.Again, do you have a specific problem with what I said or does it just not jibe with your worldview?
david_gaithersburg: Bontesla: david_gaithersburg: Climate change, yeah, its been changing since day 1. Notice how the term "global warming" was tossed once it was debunked? Link "Climate change" by its very nature can never be debunked, perpetual funding!!!!!Pecking away at the keyboard in your parents' basement does not constitute debunking in any scientific regard.I present facts and citations, all you have is name calling. Got it.
david_gaithersburg: Climate change" by its very nature can never be debunked, perpetual funding!!!!!
NobleHam: GAT_00: I've figured out how to show just how impossible this is if the planet was not warming, using the most egregious Denier assumptions I can think of. First, let's assume that the temperatures of one month have no connection to the next. That makes probability calculation easy. Second, let's assume that there is a 99% chance of a 0.01 degree increase, 98% of a 0.02, 97% of a 0.03 degree increase and so on, for easy calculation. Third, let's ignore every single month of actual data, and assume that the average global temperature for each month was 0.01 degrees above the 20th century mean. That means the probability of 332 months in a row of temperatures 0.01 degrees above average is simply 0.99 raised to the 332 power. That calculation is something below 0.05, or less than a 5% chance of happening. In other words, it is statistically significant.Under the most bullshiat, fact ignoring scenario I can think of, the chance of 332 months in a row above normal temperatures is STILL beyond a statistical expectation for the null hypothesis of no temperature change to be true. The actual data would make any statistical result even more unlikely.In other words, there is not a single scenario possible where the null hypothesis of no temperature increase versus the 20th century is possible to be not rejected. There is absolutely zero chance this is a random event and is in my mind unequivocal proof that global temperatures have increased above the 20th century mean.In other words, there is no chance Deniers are right.You... didn't read any of the actual data, did you? I'm assuming this because of all the assumptions you made which aren't even tangentially connected to the data we're looking at. For one thing, the NOAA document the article references has no references of its own more recent than 2008 and no links to data tables for the numbers its cites.There are a number of discrepancies that climate change alarmists have yet to explain.For one, the lagging of ...
MrEricSir: The skeptical question
GAT_00: It is utterly impossible for that to happen if global temperatures were not increasing.
If you like these links, you'll love
$5 a month since 19 aught diddly.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Dec 15 2017 06:19:35
Runtime: 0.520 sec (519 ms)