/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14578606
climate change shills literally cannot make an argument. they have been getting btfo here >>14574798 and here >>14575810 by true /sci/chads

>>14578624
thanks il be checking those out.
just read about the hockey stick curve controversy and spoted "we think about documents" in that article, wich made me doubt global warming

>>14578606
There are multiple research groups who replicated Mann’s results independently

>>14578689
then why cant mann prove it in court?

>>14578702
Since when scientific evidence depends on court cases?

>>14578712
then show me those
I can only find newer articles(after 2007)
Saying its proven wrong
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11646-climate-myths-the-hockey-stick-graph-has-been-proven-wrong/
Or michael mann himself writing puff pieces about himself
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/earth-day-and-the-hockey-stick-a-singular-message/
and no, it being the hottest its ever been in 1400 years means nothing

>>14578741
>newscientist
>blogs
Try harder.

>>14578749
>blog written by Michael Mann, Climatologist, should be disregarded
So, just to be clear, you don't think Michael Mann is a reliable source? Good.

>>14578758
Blogs are not science. Try harder.

>>14578749
you didn't show me your proof

>>14578768
Try harder to repudiate Michael Mann? No need, you're doing my work for me. I don't know what your problem is---it appears we're in agreement that Michael Mann is a shill who should be disregarded.

>>14578771
That blog is about the social ramifications faced by Mann after publishing his data. It's not science. It barely science adjacent.

>>14578774
It doesn't repudiate the data. Try harder.

>>14578777
you still havent

>>14578795
Read the blog you posted and then explain why you thought it had anything to do with disproving the data from the paper. You are a moron.

>>14578803
> my method is, it's reading and thinking. We read. We read documents. And we think about them.
is NOT science with a methodology
this thread is about proving global warming real, if you cant do that leave the thread

what's that i smell? is it a climate shill getting cooked in a third thread? the only thing "warming" is the shill from getting roasted.

>>14578816
lmaooooooooooooooooooooo climate fanatics btfo

>>14578841
OP again here, please, dont shitpost, post studies and proof

>>14578848
I can't, because there are no studies that suggest climate change is in any way caused by mankind.

>>14578852
lol, hes not responding so he realy couldn't
just a simple source of a study with a clear methodology

>>14578606
>prove to me that global warming is real
Nobody can do that, because it isn't real.

>>14578852

>>14578606
This is rather silly, there is no "scientific methodology" for determining that someone else work is manipulative or not. It's an exercise in reasoning and critical thinking.

>is NOT evidence of global warming
Did you read the article? The experts are not determining whether global warming exists or not, they are determining whether Mann's methodology is manipulative.

"The litigation does not intend to answer any questions about the existence of climate change or global warming."

>>14578807
>is NOT science with a methodology
Correct, there is no science for determining that Mann's methodology isn't manipulative. You're conflating Mann's methodology with expert witness testimony about his methodology. The only scientific way to verify his methodology is to repeat the result. This had been done. The only scientific way to refute it is to falsify it. This hasn't been done.

>>14578606
>prove to me that global warming is real
OK. Pic related shows global warming from thermometer data.

Latest temperature reconstruction for past 24000 years: https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/2219/

Direct observation that it's caused by human CO2 emissions: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/174407/

>>14579527
Correlation does not equal causation.

>>14579696
What correlation?

>>14579718
Don't play dumb.

>>14579722
OK, so there is no correlation that I confused with causation. Why did you lie?

>>14579727
And the mask comes off. Thanks for playing.

>>14579743
Yeah, your mask has come off since you can't even attempt to defend your claim. Why did you lie?

>>14579762
I didn't lie. I explained the problem and you ignored it.

>>14579779
What explanation? You didn't even say what correlation you're referring to. Pathetic liar.

>>14579865
It's been explained. I suggest you read the thread if you are acting in good faith (you aren't).

>>14578606
>global warming is real
There is no global warming and never were. It's an shitty political and media term made for idiots not able to grasp that or not interested.

There was a rise in the average temperature. Some +/- 0.5 °C change in an +/- 80°C dynamic temperature system until 2000 . Your shitty misleading graphic magnifies that, cuts everything else and i is a hoax / fraud like any popsci nowadays.

You are either dumb or an as...h...e because that is known for decades now. Outside this shitty bunch of retarded idiotic glownigger driven clownworld /sci has become.

>>14579880
>It's been explained.
Where? You'll never show it because you lied.

>>14579926
Read the thread.

>>14579917
>There is no global warming and never were
>There was a rise in the average temperature.
LOL, I don't even have to argue. Retarded deniers refute themselves.

>Some +/- 0.5 °C change in an +/- 80°C dynamic temperature system until 2000 .
Wrong. See >>14579527

>Your shitty misleading graphic magnifies that, cuts everything else and i is a hoax / fraud like any popsci nowadays.
Proof?

>>14579930
You didn't show it. Thanks for confirming you lied.

>>14579933
You're only lying to yourself when you refuse to read the thread.

>>14578712
Bro it's THE CURRENT YEAR don't you know that objective truth is just a power play.

On a serious note, it's disgusting how leftist managed to win this, now what is demonstrable is just left up to the whims of opinion. Data be damned.

>>14579947
And again you failed to show it. Thanks for admitting you lied.

>>14579950
No need to thank me for anything. Believe what you want, regardless of the evidence and the truth. Clearly that is your modus operandi.

>>14579957
You're the only one ignoring evidence that was given to you. We both know this. Thanks for admitting you lied.

>>14579973
I have no reason to lie.

>>14579979
No one cares. You lied.

>>14579986
You care.

>>14579989
No I couldn't care less why you lied or whether you have a reason to lie, or whether you claim there's a reason. You lied, that's all that matters. Let me know when you want to discuss something substantive.

>>14580004
Anyone reading this thread and your unwillingness to talk science can see that you care.

>>14579527
>Direct observation that it's caused by human CO2 emissions
Delusional cope. There is no direct observation, liar. They're not even certain if the solar irradiance forcing from last hundreds of years is up to 300% bigger than CO2 yet they blissfully say it's only about 1% as big in all their propaganda.

>>14578712
>Since when scientific evidence depends on court cases?
It normally doesn't but it does the moment the author of that "evidence" refuses to share it in court when reasonably asked so he can win his OWN court case. "Loosing" your own court case where you're suing someone else for calling you a fraud, via saying uh oh wait nah just kidding I dont' want to give out my data and prove I'm not a fraud, is enough to make any rational person more than skeptical.

Mann had to pay $10's of thousands in court fees to the person HE was trying to sue.
Why didn't he just share his unreleased data???