/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8733147
Just do your own research. Most of the figures reported by scientists are from independent surveys and yet have very high interrater reliability...
Check out sources like NASA and look at the data. Look up lectures from people capable of interpreting that data and learn how to interpret it yourself.
The only thing I believe in is science. I'm no fan of mass media, but for this movie to accuse the entire international scientific community of collaborating with the media to make it taboo to deny climate change is simply ludicrous.

Also sun spots are much cooler than the sun's average surface temperature. It's solar flares that can affect us, not sun spots. If flares and sun spots were responsible then the data from NASA should reflect the 11-year solar cycle with a roughly sinusoidal pattern- which it doesn't.

My old question has not yet been answered:

>>8393612

>This is a question that google could not answer properly.
>Regarding a discussion about global warming, someone mentioned that the temperature has increased since the industrial revolution more rapidly than ever (let's say some several of thousands of years). I was looking at the charts (pic related) and I have the following questions: what is the accuracy of the geological methods for measurement of the earth temperature?
>Four important agency cannot agree with today's measurement (they agree on what's going on, but not on the precise amount.) If with today's tool there are difference in measurement+error, what is the error when measuring the temperature of the earth +1000 years ago?, as low as 0.1°C - 1°C?, or as high as +10°C?
>Also, could it be possible that we are comparing different data like temperature close to the sea vs temperature of the at 1000 masl?
>I couldn't find that on google.

This is a question that google could not answer properly.

Regarding a discussion about global warming, someone mentioned that the temperature has increased since the industrial revolution more rapidly than ever (let's say some several of thousands of years). I was looking at the charts (pic related) and I have the following questions: what is the accuracy of the geological methods for measurement of the earth temperature?

Four important agency cannot agree with today's measurement (they agree on what's going on, but not on the precise amount.) If with today's tool there are difference in measurement+error, what is the error when measuring the temperature of the earth +1000 years ago?, as low as 0.1°C - 1°C?, or as high as +10°C?

Also, could it be possible that we are comparing different data like temperature close to the sea vs temperature of the at 1000 masl?

I couldn't find that on google.

>>8239536
>Evidence

Wait. Since when did GW deniers ever care about evidence? Even if I did post evidence, wouldn't you just link me to some conspiracy theory? Or say "All your sources contradict each other (Even though they all agree?) And wouldn't my evidence by "debunked" by some right-winged politician that knows better?

Fine, I'll bite the bait.

Listen you idiot, it doesn't take a complete fucking genius to realize that more greenhouse gazes in the atmosphere, that the more hotter it's going it. The increase of CO2 ppm in the atmosphere has been increasing at an alarming rate since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, mainly due to the use of fossil fuels and deforestation.

The majority of scientific institutions and most scientists agree that global warming is real. Only Republicans and a few retards without a high school degree oppose this.

Source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#Atmospheric_carbon_dioxide_and_global_warming

http://climate.nasa.gov/

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I mean just look at all these lying bastards, how dare they!!! Pushing their global agenda on us!!

https://www.opr.ca.gov/s_listoforganizations.php

It's a worldwide conspiracy to fool us into caring more about our ecosystem, how dare they!!!

I can't believe that people like this exist, it blows my mind.