/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8593449
>What next, you will also pretend the Medieval warming period didn't happen? That it was only local?
The MWP WAS only local. IIRC, Asia and the Pacific were freezing cold during that time period.

>http://pages.science-skeptical.de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod.htmx
>Image Source: co2science.org
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_the_Study_of_Carbon_Dioxide_and_Global_Change#Funding
>According to IRS records, the ExxonMobil Foundation provided a grant of $15,000 to the center in 2000.
>Another report states that ExxonMobil has funded an additional $55,000 to the center.
>The center was also funded by Peabody Energy, America’s biggest coalmining company.

Yeah, okay. A+ for integrity.

>>8593473
>>8593480
>>8593488
>Scientists revise their work in response to new information.
If you want to claim there's some kind of conspiracy, you actually need to provide evidence for it. "Scientists aren't saying the things I would like them to say" isn't evidence of misconduct.

>>8593517
>IF. THE. TEMPERATURE. RISE. IS. WITHIN. NORMAL. VARIATION. IT. IS. FUCKING. NOTHING.
It isn't though. Warming at this rate without significant change in orbital forcings is incredibly unusual, and attributable ONLY to the equally sharp rise in CO2 forcing. And of course, isotope analysis clearly shows the rise in CO2 levels is coming from buried fossil fuels, and not volcanoes and such.
This isn't guesswork, we're at "holding a smoking gun" levels of confidence.

>>8593566
>As governments grow they become...
This isn't really the place for debating politics, but if your only claim is that governments aren't as effective or representative as they should be I won't disagree. That says nothing about AGW though.

>a non problem such as some excess CO2 emissions
It's not a non-issue, you just don't want to deal with it.

>>8593630
>heat island effect.
It's well understood, and accounted for in those corrections deniers keep getting upset about.