/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8737946
>Your picture is ridiculous
So basically, you can't read the paper, you can't interpret the image because you're a brainlet.
>There is no control Earth
It's hilarious how you think you're saying something compelling, but you're really saying nothing.
>The actual geologic record shows little connection between CO2 and temperature.
Are you a geologist? I am, and making such an absolutist statement with no understanding of geochronology of paleoclimatology shows how ignorant you are. You're not smarter than the people who dedicate their lives to studying Earth history. I could go on and on naming countless examples about a recorded connection between CO2 and temperature changes in Earth's past, but let's just name one of the most important ones in Earth history, the Permian-Triassic extinction. CO2 ppm rose to 2000ppm, and the largest mass extinction in Earth history occurred, linked to massive bouts of volcanism (Siberian Traps) over millions of years. 96% of marine species went extinct, and over half of terrestrial species as well. That specific enough for you? That's just one example.
>The only reason the models supposedly show one is because they're assumed to and various fudge factors are shoved in to make them conform
C O N J E C T U R E - look up the word and stop making baseless claims. Back up and provide legitimate sources for the shit you spew or GTFO.
>They have no predictive power because they don't reflect reality.
Wrong, educate yourself on what climate models are and what they do from an actual climatologist:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/faq-on-climate-models/

>They don't include things like the wind, volcanoes, ocean oscillations, El Nino and even the Sun. Yes, the Sun is not in alarmist climate models.
It's absolutely astounding how ignorant you are, how little you know, and how arrogant you are about your own ignorance. Climate models of climate sensitivity include ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

>>8618482
I'll leave you with this. Maybe, just maybe I'll hold out hope that you will actually read some sources, and understand the evidence for yourself, but I have to sleep.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292188056_An_imperative_to_monitor_Earth's_energy_imbalance


Debating with you people is like debating with creationists, you simply won't change your mind based on scientific evidence, because it doesn't fit your narrative.