/sci/ - Science & Math

Would you prefer for them to be installed where it will not challenge your worldviews?

>>15459580
they are paid by government to deceive. it's their only usefulness.

>>15459580
global warming is fake af
science is cap

>>15459580
It is not deceitful if carried out under the same conditions for a long time. You would get a baseline of what is normal temperature for that parking lot and see if it changes over time.

>>15460866
anon, theyre not writing papers on the temperature of that parking lot.

>>15461179
Actual brainlet detected

University of Arizona is a low IQ school, most of the student body is Californians who failed to get into UC schools.

The NICMOS guy is from University of Arizona too, his stupidly designed camera cost NASA $5 billion in repairs to HST, they had to do a whole emergency servicing mission because of that idiot.
Then NASA allowed the same retard to work on JWST, now you know why and who is responsible for JWST being 15 years behind schedule.

>>15460866
>You would get a baseline of what is normal temperature
Its being compared to ancestral fake measurements like counting tree rings in boreal forests. Absolutely dogshit

Hurr

>>15459580
Damn if only the rural stations and the urban ones didn’t agree

>>15460866
The problem with that plan, one of the problems, is that the albedo of asphalt changes with age.
Another problem is that the albedo of the carpark itself changes depending on the precise configuration of cars on it. If a white or black car consistently parks near the instrument for a period of time, then changes their habit, that will show up in the data with no record made of these changes.

Basically the data is trash.

>>15462118
>graph starts at end of little ice age
errry single time

>>15462118
Wait until you find out what "very rural" stations look like. Somehow they can find the only piece of tarmac in 100 miles to site their thermometers.

>>15459580
You know there's far more evidence of man made climate change than a few temperature stations, yes?

Ice caps are melting at an alarming rate as is evident from sediment samples taken from under ice which show ice shelf extent over time (sediment that accumulates under ice is far finer than sediment that accumulates under open ocean). We actually have ice cap extent data going back over 80,000 years.

Over 95% of all glaciers are disappearing.

Animals and plants are migrating closer to the poles each year.

Plants are blooming earlier. Animals are migrating sooner.

Arctic penguins are being replaced by subarctic penguins.

Tropical fish are moving into subtropical oceans such as the sea of Japan.

All of this is happening while solar irradiation is stable. Meanwhile it's getting warmer faster at night than in the day. It's getting warmer faster at the poles than in the tropics and temperate zones. The troposphere is warming while the stratosphere is cooling and there's less energy from Earth radiating back out into space.

So, what's your theory on why all that's happening? If not man made climate change from increased carbon gases in the atmosphere? What alternative theory do you propose?

>>15462540
Do you trust the replication crisis publications that are telling you these things are happening?

>>15462542
Not an argument. I'm quoting sample data, not academic papers which interpret data.

Do you not know the difference?

>>15462551
You don't seem to be quoting any data, just making assertions based on your trust in replication crisis soience.

>>15462556
The replication crisis has to do with experimentation, not data collection. Seriously, how dumb are you?

>>15462557
The replication crisis is about fraud at all levels of soientific endeavor. It should rightly be called the fraud crisis because most often it manifests as fraudulent data collection.

See thread related for just one more example of climate sois committing fraud >>15454377

>>15462562
So if all science is wrong where do you get information?

>>15462565
Thank you for conceding that climate soience is based on lies.

>>15462567
Didn't answer my question. You're the one asserting that all science is a lie. Not me. I accept that it's impossible to obfuscate all science, that the replication crisis you're so fond of was limited primarily to medical journals, that evidence for man made climate change has been ongoing for over a century, and the data to back it up is insurmountable and cannot be caused by several bad actors. It must be universal and complete across all disciplines, which would imply a global conspiracy at all levels which is so amazingly stupid that it defies logic.

I simply cannot have a discussion with someone who believes everything everywhere is a lie and uses that as a sledgehammer to discount anything they don't like.

So I ask again. If all science is wrong, where do you get information?

>>15462580
Now that we've empirically established by observation that climate soience is based primarily on fraud, I'm not sure why you find it difficult to accept that you were wrong.

>>15462584
It is not and has never been based on fraud. The data you discount is publicly available. The replication crisis you assert to discount everything is about experimentation, not data. As I already explained. Yet you seem unable to answer for yourself. Neither do you seem to understand the difference of what you, yourself are asserting. Nor do you offer any counter argument other than 'all science bad'. You seem to lack the intelligence or the training or both to formulate a meaningful argument that discounts the data and can only rely on a meta study of psychology and medical journals from over a decade ago that if experimentation in those fields is flawed that must mean all data is also flawed. Which is not at all what the replication crisis was ever about but you seem unable to tell the difference.

Now, do you have something actual meaningful to share, or have you given up and can only repeat yourself?

>>15462599
You seem to be deeply emotionally disturbed by this discussion, as your post contains a great deal of unnecessary language. I suggest seeing a psychiatrist to get counseling.

>>15461179
The average climate-denier kek

>>15462607
So you're reduced to ad hominem now.

Here, I will help you.

You found 1 paper that had to be retracted in 12 years, therefore your conclusion is 'all science is a lie'. Do you see where your flaw in logic is?

You found that medical and psychology journals had a replication crisis a decade ago and concluded 'all science is a lie'. Do you see where your flaw in logic is?

Here is a picture of glaciers melting. Your assertion is 'because people can't replicate experiments in medicine and psychology, this photograph doesn't exist'. Do you see where your flaw in logic is?

>>15461195
thats arizona state

>>15461665
University of Arizona has a fancy, multi billion dollar astronomy program because of it's proximity to Kitt Peak, not because anyone there has the demonstrated intellectual capability to contribute to the science. Have an astro department because you're near a mountain is like saying that you're a plumbing expert because your office is next door to the bathroom

>>15462365
What’s your point?

>>15462732
that graph really took off after they moved all the thermometers to parking lots

>>15462753
>data proves you wrong
>claim the data is fake
Good arguments here

>>15462763
Well Mann admitted it was fake, and the soientists behind "getting rid of" the medieval warm period privately discussed their own fraud. This is all old news so I'm surprised you didn't know it.

>>15462540
You made a lot of claims there. How about adding a shred of proof to go with them

>>15462768
Nice fanfic. Multiple proxy datasets that have been made in the last 20 years all agree with Mann’s graph

>>15462803
What proof have you posted besides flat out refusing to accept observational evidence of temperature?

>>15462079
>>>>>>drawing a straight line
lmao

>>15462976
>data proves you wrong
>talk about nonsense
Good stuff

>>15462971
>proxy datasets have been set up after the data was already gathered
>somehow gathered the same data
lmao

>>15462973
>>15462768
scientists literally committed fraud to make climate change seem worse than it was
>>15459580
>positioning a thermometer on a parking lot
>with asphalt
if you honestly think this data is in any way trustworthy you're a retard and i cannot help you.

>>15462982
>if you honestly think this data is in any way trustworthy you're a retard and i cannot help you.
If you want a real laugh, their "corrections for the urban island effect" are to increase modern temperatures and lower past ones. The exact opposite of what should be done if you want to eliminate a false warming trend due to over-exposed thermometers.

>>15462978
>straight line literally does not match up with the last few years
>obviously was ignored in order to portray muh line go up we all gon die fairy tale
I could draw a line right now and make it seem twice as flat. It's a complete nothing burger and you know it.
Also any of these 'global average' measurements are complete and utter garbage. you literally cannot just average the temperature of the entire world and expect to get a consistent answer. it's entirely unphysical.

>>15462987
>you literally cannot just average the temperature of the entire world and expect to get a consistent answer. it's entirely unphysical.
This even assumes that there's good coverage of the globe for any of these data sources, which there is not. Satellite data is represented without the (massive) error bars it has, and ground stations don't record the majority of the world so the local data is "reconstructed" from... Yep! The same model that over-predicts warming!
The entire production of these graphs is a master class on data fraud.

>>15462987
>I don’t understand how trend lines work
Lmao
>>15462985
The raw data overestimates warming though not that you knew that

>>15462992
>if I didn’t measure the temperature myself then it’s a fraud
Fuck off with that flat earth tier argument
Do you have any specific arguments about the methodology or are you just talking out of your ass?

>>15463003
>The raw data overestimates warming though not that you knew that
Where could you possibly be getting this idea from? The corrections to raw NOAA climatological station data are extremely well known.

>>15463011
>>if I didn’t measure the temperature myself then it’s a fraud
Who said this, and where?

>>15463003
>early 1900's
>industrial era already in full swing for a 100 years
>-0.2 degrees
>1960
>+0.6 degrees
so the entire big increase already occured.
>2020 (60 years later)
>+1.2 degrees
and these measurements are including trying to defraud the data by using fraudulent data points (see op's shitty thermo placement) and trying to """""""""""""""correct"""""""""""" the data. Even the uncorrected data is untrustworthy probably. Especially the later ones because of the bias introduced by purposefully bad thermometer placement.
All in all warming is clearly already decreasing. It's a complete nothingburger.

>>15463019
>All in all warming is clearly already decreasing. It's a complete nothingburger.
And this can be empirically observed by anyone with the worsening cold in winter.

>>15463014
>the global raw temperature clearly overestimates warming
>still refusing to accept it
If you only know about the regional US temperature previous to the year 2000 which was cherry picked then of course you have the wrong idea you retard. No shit they never post data after 2000.

>>15463023
Are you schizophrenic? Where is this nonsense all coming from? You're not even talking about what I said, you're just making stuff up and reposting random graphs.

>>15463019
>I’ll just assume the data is fraudulent when it goes against my beliefs
Damn these arguments are so good

>>15463026
I showed you the corrected and raw datasets and it clearly shows the raw data overestimating warming due to the urban heating effect.

>>15463030

>>15461179
kek include me in the screenshot

>>15463033
>talking about the global temperature raw vs corrected on the GIS product
>bring up the US temperature from a completely different product
You know that temperature changes differently from region to region right?
Nonetheless these adjustments to the US data were validated by the setup of stations to verify the adjustments over a 10 year+ period.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2015GL067640

>>15462973
You are the one making the positive claims
>Over 95% of all glaciers are disappearing.
>Animals and plants are migrating closer to the poles each year.
>Plants are blooming earlier. Animals are migrating sooner.
>Arctic penguins are being replaced by subarctic penguins.
>Tropical fish are moving into subtropical oceans such as the sea of Japan.
Surely you must have a lot of evidence for all these ominous phenomena

this one placed in a hot spring is particularly funny. the soientists must've lol'd their asses off when they installed this one

>NOOOOO NOT MY HECKIN UNSHADED PARKERINOS IN ARIZONA THIS IS NOT ALLOWED
>THEY SHOULD ALL BE IN ICE BATHS INSIDE FRIDGES IN AIR-CONDITIONED STORES

>>15462732
damn, didn't know they had thermometres back in the day

>>15459600
>has worldview changed
lmao imagine

>>15461182
>>15462620
>>15463041
They are 100% comparing it to Arizona temperatures 100 years ago.
I'd bet my life.

>>15463492
Look. They can't be expected to GO OUT IN NATURE.
That's absurd.

>>15463497
Propaganda shills are can't debate the data, so they act childish instead. Lol.

>>15463492
I wonder how many are located in volcanoes

>>15462118
>This data isn't all back-corrected as hell to fit the current paradigm.

>>15464593

>>15461665
yeah, the nicmos camera on hst failed because so extremely basic physics were badly misinterpreted by university of arizona clowns. they still go to keep their $400 million grant though, no punishment or consequences for failure in soience

>>15462687
>is like saying that you're a plumbing expert because your office is next door to the bathroom
lol'd

>I spend hours of my life defending corporation's rights to spew toxic gases into the air.

>>15464812
its funny because its true

>>15464812
Which toxic gas?

>>15463081
Are you serious?
https://googlethatforyou.com?q=Animals%20and%20plants%20are%20migrating%20closer%20to%20the%20poles%20each%20year

The rest are up to you, lazy fuck

>>15464977
So you admit you have no sources. Thank you for finally conceding.

Because they have no data. All of it is made up. It has been a lot hotter and a lot colder than today. You are welcome.