/sci/ - Science & Math

How can people still believe in Climate change when it has literally been record cold temperatures in the Midwest and Eastern US?

>>8487427

>They aren't contradictory. You are confusing two different mechanisms, which are both discussed in each article:

Nitpicking. If a mechanism that was a consequence of AGW was causing more snowfall, then it was false to claim an end to snow irregardless of what happened to the additional snowfall due to the other alleged mechanism caused by AGW. Also, the claim of harsher blizzards and more snowfall as a result of AGW isn't panning out as promised.

http://www.weathertrends360.com/Blog/Uploads/2014/08/o-snow-chart.png

http://www.weathertrends360.com/Blog/Post/Long-Range-Weather-Forecasting-The-2014-2015-Winter-Outlook-1935

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-snow-cover

>But climate change is nothing if not complex

So complex that the effects of climate change is unfalsifiable since virtually any weather event is anecdotal evidence for AGW.

BTW: you still did not address AGW believers purging their own members for supporting nuclear power nor have you addressed using AGW to push unrelated political agendas and carbon credit indulgences.

>>8483408
> Baaaw stop talking this is supposed to be my safe space!

>>8281041
>> Look mommy! I marked up a graph. They should know that only certified Climate Change Believers can define what a trend is.
What's this? >>8280887
>> When we say a 'multi-decadal' pause in warming would disprove climate change, we were just joking.

Warmist definition of cherry-picking. "Any data set that would falsify Climate Change."