/sci/ - Science & Math

Jesus. I'm a just a software engineer (albeit a published one who knows how stats work) and not a climate scientist, but the actual scientists in this thread are so on point as far of bringing in different lines of evidence to explain why we're so sure AGW fits together in the ways that it does, and the denialists are so unbelievably fucking obtuse, in a way that shows because of how out of their depth they are and how many counterfactuals they have to invent to keep their insanity spinning.
>What if CO2 doesn't actually mix on timescales relevant to ice samples despite all the lines of evidence that it does?
> What if the CO2 comes from the warming even though we've known the casual relation goes the other way since the late 1800s and despite carbon dating suggesting it's from fossil fuel burning?
> Non-linearity/chaos means you can't predict anything! (Because apparently Lyapunov times and finite element methods aren't things)
> Show me an experiment I can do!
> Okay, but show me one I can do despite my willful mathematical and scientific illiteracy! You're hiding the truth! You are in the pocket of big...science...academia...SJW... snowflake!

It's so horribly pitiful. If this is what we have to work with in the broader political system, we are totally boned.