/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11315865
"corrected" k.
isn't it a funny coincidence how all these corrections neatly add up to validating the original hypothesis no matter what the supposed cause or explanation?

>>10670876
>Of course it does. Give me $100 or you lose the argument.
Still unable to define what the "climate" actually is as a singular entity. Checkmate.
>Why?
Checkmate again.
>How are they pseudoscience?
Because computer models are not real life.
>What is the process for "guesstimating" and how is it equivalent to "making up" temperatures? What source is telling you 50% of the temp record is guesstimated?
They analyse all of the temperature data, and then fill in the blanks based upon the recorded temperature data. I guess they can do what they want. Source is pic related.