/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8668786
>Zerohedge
Next you'll be posting us some Breitbart or Infowars links, right?

>>8632538
You treat science like everything is supposed to have a clear and simple answer, and you're idea of climate is that it's simple and straightforward, not an incredibly complex system.

So you fall into the same fallacies of thinking that your simple-minded view of climate science ideas is the only way to look at the ideas themselves.

As for the hot spot:
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v3/n12/full/ngeo1025.html
>Controversy has surrounded projections of tropical temperatures aloft in a changing climate. An analysis of sea surface temperatures and rainfall over the past decades suggests amplified warming in the upper atmosphere, consistent with theory and models.

Oh, it's the CO2 lag again. My god how many times has this shit been debunked and you retards keep bringing it up as a "GOTCHYA!"
Literally look at the Mauna Loa data you stupid cunt:
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/full.html

Oh wait, NOAA is not valid to you because muh gubmint conspiracy

As for polar ice, see the other thread where you're autistic screeching is debunked time and time again.
>>8629085

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/338/6111/1183
> Between 1992 and 2011, the ice sheets of Greenland, East Antarctica, West Antarctica, and the Antarctic Peninsula changed in mass by –142 ± 49, +14 ± 43, –65 ± 26, and –20 ± 14 gigatonnes year−1, respectively. Since 1992, the polar ice sheets have contributed, on average, 0.59 ± 0.20 millimeter year−1 to the rate of global sea-level rise.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/11/03/antarctic_ice_still_losing_mass.html

>Failed Predictions + Tampered Data
PROVE IT. BE SPECIFIC. Show the proof that data is willfully tampered. Show proof that the predictions have failed, because it's so easy to spread conjecture with no evidence. You have no evidence though, none.