/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15982432
I think like this every single year. Maybe it's the same every year but due to time intervals we forget the coldness of the year before.

>>15982432
where is from?

>>15982432
during last summer's heat wave there were a few articles saying we'd never see cold winters and snow again

>>15982432
but its cold not warm

Were the 30 days real?

>>15982476
The fucking HIGH was -11 once last week. Found some historical weather data for where I live and confirmed it was the coldest day of my entire life and in the top 5 all time. Second coldest day of my life was the same day a couple years ago that the entire Texas power grid collapsed because it was so fucking cold.

>>15982501
I'll trade a day of below zero in January for a day of 105 in July every fucking time.

>>15982432
It didn't even get cold here until 4-5 days ago. I was comfortable in a long-sleeve T-shirt and jeans on Christmas! And it's forecasted to warm back up to 60F next week!

>>15983193
Still weird that amidst global warming, we're still hitting consistent record lows. I can't find any data from the IPCC or anywhere else that catalogs the coldest twenty years on record. Peculiar

>>15983230
It's because the polar vortex is destabilizing.

>>15982501
>a few articles
on the newspaper, since you've never touched a singl journal in your life

>>15982432
If only that were true on a local scale.

>>15983293
>Vague response
Discarded.

>>15983230
>I can't find any data from the IPCC or anywhere else that catalogs the coldest twenty years on record. Peculiar
Peculiar that the "skeptic" sucks at googling lol.
The coldest twenty years on record as of 2019: https://mashable.com/article/climate-change-cold-records-rare
You only have 4 years to manually check if they were colder. Well, three, since 2023 was the warmest year on record, so I doubt it's in the top 20 of the coldest years.

I love watching people who are so weak to the cold that they can't be bothered to take a few seconds to return their shopping carts complain about climate change.

>>15982432
East coast here. Dunno what your talking about.
Winter's been pretty mild.
Usually we need to use a snowblower and shovels to dig our house, cars, and driveway out of snow multiple times each winter. But we've barely had any snow. Only once did we break out the shovels, and even then we didn't really need to because the snow all melted the next day.

If global weather patterns change, does that mean all the ski resorts move to somewhere else on the map? They all move to where the snow is?

>>15983317
Do you live under a rock? Are you aware that google is free?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_vortex
https://www.weather.gov/safety/cold-polar-vortex
https://abc13.com/noaa-polar-vortex-southeast-texas-freeze-winter-weather/14334312/
https://www.foxweather.com/weather-news/polar-vortex-arctic-blast-us-2024
https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/climate-change-impacts/why-polar-air-keeps-breaking-out-arctic
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/polar-vortex

>>15983322
>mashable.com

>>15983338
Point out any flaw in the dataset

>>15983340
no thanks

>>15983322
>Average
Why yes, if you use the same metric you do to determine global warming you'll find record average temps occurred way in the past. That's not what I was talking about retard.

>>15983335
>Link dumping
Not an argument.

>>15983344
You asked about
>the coldest twenty years on record
Maybe try not to be a mongoloid if you want people to understand you.

>>15983347
Did you see "average" in my post? No, that's something you inserted. I accept your concession.

>>15983349
It's quite telling that the climate cultists are so stuck to their talking points that they don't understand the difference between regional variance and global averages. They interpret all discussions in terms of averages. Sad, really.

>>15982432
>all winter is abnormally warm and snowless
>except 1-2 days that are abnormally cold
>consumerist shills in denial, scream; "those 1-2 days disprove global warming!!!"
Very paid or bot-like behavior.

>>15983358
>>all winter is abnormally warm and snowless
proves global warming
>>except 1-2 days that are abnormally cold
also proves global warming

do you see how it's basically an unfalsifiable hypothesis, that literally no climate pattern could be used to "disprove" it

>>15983362
Nta, but global warming in and of itself is pure empirical data. One could question the methodology such as more thermometers in urban areas in sunlight. But the data is there.

What the climate cultist doomsday soothsayers do is interpret any anomalous event (with respect to averages, lol) as the result of this global warming data. It's a Boogeyman. Which is why if you question the methodology behind their global warming god, their entire climatological perspective completely shatters. Which is why they'll never give it up and thump their global warming Bible until they're red in the face.

>>15983346
There are six links, retard. You can pick any one of them. I even included Fox because I'm sure you like them. Somehow you've remained ignorant despite every news source trying to inform you. Fix that.

>>15983362
>have 80 days at 40F
>have 20 days at 15F
>averages to 35F
vs
>have 90 days at 50F
>have 10 days at -10F
>averages to 44F
35F < 44F
>iT's BaSiCaLlY aN uNfAlSiFyAbLe HyPoThEsIs

>>15983069
cold weather is the white man's abode

>>15983382
>Somehow you've remained ignorant despite every news source trying to inform you.
I will not follow whatever the MSM tells me, dumb fuck

>>15983402
Fix that, retard. Read any one of those links and you will be less ignorant.

>>15983349
Then define what you mean by "coldest year" if the normal definition is not what you mean.

>>15983411
Stupid fuck
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/winter-storms-freeze-snow
https://www.arabiaweather.com/en/content/around-the-world-low-and-record-temperatures-were-recorded-in-several-countries-at-the-beginning-of-2024
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_weather_records
Coldest and hottest are recorded under temperature. By eye, you can certainly see many countries having the coldest recorded temperature in the past 20 years (you'll see it's not up to date). You'll also see many countries having their hottest recorded temperatures being over 20 years ago. You'll also see a lot of the coldest years clustered to a cold snap year in the 50s. If climatologists were honest they'd also track the 20 coldest years in recorded history. I couldn't find that data. It's because they don't care. All they care about is their agenda and finding, shall we say, the "correct" results. Imagine how damning it'd be if the IPCC published that most areas have a cluster of record lows recorded recently? Unlike you, some of us don't memory hole these things.

>>15983230
For every record low in the past decade, there's been many many more record highs.

>>15983488
A year isn't "the coldest year" just because it was very cold one day. Are you ESL or stupid?

>cold winters mean it's real
>warm winters mean it's real
>hot summers mean it's real
>cool summers mean it's real
>rainy weather means it's real
>dry weather means it's real
Damn, I wish there was a single word to describe theories like that...

>>15984333
State-sanctioned

>>15984333
hegelian

>>15984377
Checked

>>15983316
>OH NO IT'S HOT IN AFRICA SHUT IT ALL DOWN

>>15984324
https://www.arabiaweather.com/en/content/around-the-world-low-and-record-temperatures-were-recorded-in-several-countries-at-the-beginning-of-2024

>>15983230
>>15983322
>>15983344
>>15983347
>>15983488
>>15984292
>>15984559
>record
Today, I will remind them.
Run this command in your terminal.

python3 -c "import numpy as np; import matplotlib.pyplot as plt; x = np.random.normal(size=1000); plt.plot(x, label='value'); plt.plot(np.maximum.accumulate(x), label='record max'); plt.plot(np.minimum.accumulate(x), label='record min'); plt.gca().set(xlabel='time', title='records over time under stationary noise'); plt.legend(); plt.show()"

>>15984598
So all this global warming nonsense is a result of random noise. Thanks for admitting that.

>>15984631
>Thanks for admitting that.
Don't know who you think I am.
That was my first post ITT.

>>15983324
This is how they're getting away with it.
More efficient and affordable heating and cooling of spaces become widely available and used more frequently.
Screwing with people's recollection of the pasts weather.

>>15982432
it's climate change, chud.

>>15983316
>the global warming institute
political propaganda is not science

>>15984668
>the name affects the data
How? Criticise the data and not the name of the institute.

>>15982432

>>15986385
>heads I win, tails you lose

>>15986391
there seems to be an obvious trend in that data

>>15986404
Yeah, it involves models not matching up with reality.

>>15986391
>>15986416
That image is propaganda manufactured by the Friends of Science organization which receives their funding from fossil fuel companies. They intentionally manipulated the observations to look as though they don't match the models. Pic related is real data plotted against real models.

>>15986385
>source: .gov
stop shilling ZOG propaganda on the science board. go to >>>/pol/ if you want to post political propaganda

>>15986391
>>15986416
>>15986419

>>15986420
Take your meds, retard.

>>15986419
Was that before or after recalibration to the actual data?

>>15986419
I sure hope those observations don't use NOAA surface stations

>>15986549
>The heartland institute
More propaganda

>>15986437
They didn't need to recalibrate their models. The data fit perfectly.

>>15986549
>Spreading propaganda for free
Suck less corporate dick.

>>15986419
Source?

>>15986555
>>15986558
Samefaggot
>when it supports my position, it's Le Settled Science™
>when it opposes my position, it's le heckin' propaganda!
Get a grip, faggot

>>15982432
Is always like that, no matter what happens they always blame "global warming". Those climate cultists are so imbecile, so ignorant, so stupid they can't see what is self evident.

>>15986566
On the image or the Friends of Science?

>>15986419
>anything that disproves my theory is CONSPIRACY

>>15986568
Cope harder, bootlicker.

>>15986573
It doesn't disprove anything and the Friends of Science have been shown to receive funding from fossil fuel companies. If you don't want to be called out for using propaganda made with fake data then don't use propaganda made with fake data.

>>15986421
>Nearly zero error for a 5 year span around 1980
>Rapid increase in temperature
>Errors begin increasing
Wtf? No way that shit is real

>>15986574
>t. bootlicks for government control of society

>>15986572
The image.

>>15986582
Here's a source I found for the image.

https://sciencepost.fr/climat-avec-quelle-precision-les-scientifiques-evaluent-ils-lanomalie-thermique-mondiale/

They credit N. Lenssen & al. 2019 which you can download here and contains the image so it's the original source.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20190025800/downloads/20190025800.pdf

>>15986579
where do you get your data from?

>>15986586
Sure, kid. Try to stop being a useful idiot.

>>15986589
>Government-funded propaganda

>>15986587
https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northwest/topic/basics-global-climate-models

>>15986592
>t. government bootlicker and useful idiot for the WEF

>>15986591
From the sources they claim to use. It's trivial to compare the fake data you posted with real data from the actual source.

>>15986596
>usda.gov
literal US government propaganda

>>15986599
>you posted
don't be schizophrenic retard. I haven't posted any data.
what's the actual source?

>>15986594
>>15986597
Take your meds. You are not being gangstalked by the government or random old rich dudes.

>>15986604
See
>>15986589
>>15986596

>>15986600
See >>15986605

>>15986605
You're shilling for the US government and posting US government propaganda.
Bootlicker.

>>15986614
Nonsense. The US government prefers the status quo which is why very little action is being taken.

>>15986605
no one mentioned gangstalking, retard
you're parroting american government propaganda

>>15986621
The US government prefers the propaganda you're posting. It funds it, after all.

>>15986621
>very little action is being taken.
what do you mean by that?

>>15986623
No, I'm implying that you're schizophrenic because you believe that the government is out to get you. That is a classic schizophrenic delusion just like gangstalking.

>>15986627
The US is failing to even meet the agreements we've made, which were already inadequate.

>>15986579
If I said "your pro-climate change scientist got money from Builderberg Group", you'd call me a loon and for good reason.

>>15986629
>you're schizophrenic because you believe that the government is out to get you

>>15986630
what agreement are you referring to?
>inadequate
why do you say that?

>>15986629
classic bootlicker response
>the government has your best interests at heart, citizen! hand over more control to the government!
could you be any more retarded?

>>15986624
Nonsense. US politicians get donations from fossil fuel companies and are happy to put their propaganda in public schools in return. Google "Petrol Pete". Further, almost the entire US military structure is based on fossil fuels so they have no interest in limiting their supply.

>>15986629
Ah, so the government doesn't want more taxes and control over my life?
Got it.

>>15986633
>>15986637
Get medicated. Nobody is saying the government is infallible, what I'm saying is that your baseless claims of conspiracy are delusions.

>>15986639
US politicians get their salaries from the US government.
You're posting US government propaganda.

>>15986639
>only oil companies fund propaganda
>anyone who disagrees with me is funded by oil companies
>environmentalists like the Sierra Club would never pay anyone to lie, especially if it meant profiting off of wind and solar
>and they certainly wouldn't disparage nuclear or hydroelectric, oh no!

>>15986641
>Nobody is saying the government is infallible
>this is why we must give the US government more power and control over our lives

>>15986634
The Paris Agreement. It's inadequate because the mission statement was to limit warming to 2 C, but the agreements made would fail to meet that mark, even if the countries who made them actually kept up their end.

>>15986640
The government already makes plenty of tax revenue off of fossil fuels. You know you're paying taxes on every gallon you put into your truck, right?

>>15986642
>>15986643
The fact that you think these are salient arguments demonstrates your need for meds.

>>15986644
In what way do you imagine that reducing carbon emissions will give the government more control of your life?

>>15986646
>The Paris Agreement.
what about it?
>It's inadequate because... the agreements made would fail to meet that mark
why does that make it "inadequate" for me, a private citizen?

>>15986651
Not an argument.

>>15986649
So the government doesn't want more taxes and control over my life?

>>15986655
How do you intend to "reduce carbon emissions"?

>>15986658
Because of the ramifications of global warming. Try to keep up.

>>15986670
what about them?

>>15986665
Democratically.

>>15986676
You dodged the question.
How do you intend to "reduce carbon emissions"?

>>15986662
They won't get more taxes. Nobody in the US has put forward a carbon tax or anything similar. They already have plenty of control over you. Since the patriot act was signed into law the NSA has created massive server farms to store all of your personal information, a warrant can be issued to install a remote kill device on your vehicle without your permission or knowledge, the police, FBI, DEA, ATF, and other government agencies can get warrants to hack your phone or all phones within a specific area, ect. Why don't you look up who voted for the patriot act, which party they were, and which of them are still in Congress?

>>15986665
Personally? I reduce my energy use and waste, grow/raise a portion of my food, and I sequester carbon in the form of biochar which has the benefit of improving my soil. If you want the details on how the US intended to reduce their emissions then look into the details of the Paris Agreement.

>>15986674
They are costly and you will feel the effects. Are you 4 years old?

>>15986679
>They won't get more taxes.
Why are you a liar?

>>15986686
>Personally?
No. Now answer the question:
How do you intend to "reduce carbon emissions"?
>look into the details of the Paris Agreement.
Gives the government more power and control over our lives.
QED.

>>15986691
What taxes do you imagine they'll institute?

>>15986694
Higher tax rates. Carbon taxes. Taxes for X, Y, Z. Taxes on top of taxes. Taxes out the ass.
Look at California.

>>15986692
No, it doesn't. They're improving infrastructure and installing solar panels. Here's the Biden Administrations plan. There's nothing sinister and nobody is after you.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate/

>>15986696
None of those taxes exist or have ever been put forward at any level of government in the US.

>>15986687
>They are costly
how so?
>you will feel the effects
what effects?

>>15986697
>No, it doesn't.
Yes it does.
>nobody is after you.
Then why do they want to take my money by force?

>>15983324
>can't be bothered to take a few seconds to return their shopping carts
Imagine actively sabotaging the only easy job teenagers get.
I DELIBERATELY put my carts in the cart return area outside so that some young person gets paid to stroll outside pushing carts around instead of lifting bags of cement or cleaning dishes or whatever.

>>15986699
Look it up. You can read the IPCC report or any number of estimates of the economic cost of climate change.

https://www.ipcc.ch/reports/

https://www.wsj.com/science/environment/climate-change-us-economy-c9fbda96
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2023/03/14/the-importance-of-measuring-the-fiscal-and-economic-costs-of-climate-change/
https://epic.uchicago.edu/area-of-focus/climate-change-and-the-us-economic-future/

>>15986698
>Increases in tax rates don't exist
Yes they do.
>or have ever been put forward
Yes they have:
https://www.c2es.org/document/carbon-pricing-proposals-in-the-117th-congress/
https://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-pricing-congress/
Furthermore, that is irrelevant. What is relevant is your intent to do so in the future.

>>15986700
Take your meds.

>>15986704
>Look it up.
not an answer
if you can't explain in your own words how it will cost me, and prove it, you're full of it

>>15986707
Not an argument.

>>15986704
lol. Retards didn't get their climate refugees, so now they are straight paying them to come and ruin the west.

>>15986706
>Yes they do.
Show me any of them.

>Yes they have:
I was unaware of those proposals, but they only apply to methane. How much methane do you use on a yearly basis? Your taxes aren't going up.

>>15986708
I have provided you with sources that address your question. I'm not going to hold your hand more than that.

>>15986715
>Show me any of them.
Tax rate increases? Please.
>I was unaware of those proposals, but they only apply to methane.
Now you're moving the goalposts.
>Your taxes aren't going up.
Yes they are.

>>15986716
>i'm full of it
thanks for conceding

>>15986718
Show me any carbon tax that has been passed.

>Now you're moving the goalposts.
No, I acknowledged that I was wrong about there not being any carbon tax proposals whatsoever and pointed out that the tax only applies to methane, which I doubt you use in any appreciable amount.

>Yes they are.
What taxes have been increased or instituted?

>>15986719
The irony. There was never any debate. You asked questions and got answers. Even if it were a debate you don't win by being too lazy to read an article.

>>15986720
>Show me any carbon tax that has been passed.
You moved the goalposts.
You said:
>None of those taxes exist or have ever been put forward at any level of government in the US.
In other words, you lied.
>the tax only applies to methane
Methane is a hydrocarbon.

Furthermore, as I pointed out:
>that is irrelevant. What is relevant is your intent to do so in the future.

>>15986722
>There was never any debate.
because you never made an argument

>>15986723
>You moved the goalposts.
No, you have failed to show any existing carbon tax.

>In other words, you lied.
Drama queen. I was wrong about one thing I said this entire conversation.

What taxes have gone up? Surely you can tell me exactly how climate change has raised your taxes.

>>15986724
There was no argument. You never made a statement to be argued against. You asked questions, got answers, and we're too lazy to read an article.

>>15986726
>No
Yes. You said:
>None of those taxes exist or have ever been put forward at any level of government in the US.
>or have ever been put forward at any level of government in the US
You lied.
And now, you just lied again about moving the goalposts.

>>15986730
which you're too lazy to summarize and put in your own words

>>15986730
Let's be honest here, anon: Did *you* read your article?
Likely you didn't, since you refused to summarize it.

>>15986732
If you can't engage in a genuine discussion then fuck off and talk to a psychiatrist.

>>15986734
>>15986738
I'm not going to hold your hand any more than I have. Reading isn't just something you had to do in high school.

>>15986568
I don't want to see shit by the "Heartland institute" or the "CO2 coalition" or any other shill corporations propped up by big oil.

>>15986633
>I have no argument
I accept your concession.

>>15986767
>I don't want to see shit by "National geographic" or "Scientific American", or any other shill publication propped up by atheist groups
This is how you sound.

>>15986776
You actually want to put a fucking think tank on the same level of reputability as a scientific journal? Why are you on this board?

picrel is the guy behind the global warming scam.
as you can see he is deeply involved in politics and only considers science as a level of power to be used in advancing his political goals.

>>15986783
Yeah it's called scientist activism and some of them do it because they actually believe in what they research. Scientist activists are the reason gasoline no longer has lead and cigarette advertising is regulated.

>>15984377
Honest to God, this fucking nigger had to been some evil sorcerer.

>>15986743
Don't project your mental illness.

>>15986744
I see you didn't.

>>15986767
>>15986779
>says the tard shilling US government propaganda

>>15986785
>activist
Thank you for being honest.
It's nothing more than the hysterics of left-wing activists and shills for the US Democratic Party who want to push leftism and expand State power.

>>15986794
the atheist power fantasy always leads to the same place

>>15986785
>that image
>"scientist activism"
no wonder people don't trust scientists

>>15986795
True.

>>15986779
>You actually want to put a fucking science publication on the same level of reputability as a priest? Why are you on this board?

>>15986794

>>15986589
ESL? I'm not questioning the validity of the source. Obviously it's from a paper. I'm questioning the validity of the data acquisition. Nearly zero error for a short span of five years with rapid increasing temperature is a red flag for data manipulation

>>15986798
Shouldn't the bottom one say "Judaist extremists?"

>>15986701
>being a lazy shit is le good because it means le jobs
kys

>>15986790
The irony.

>>15987129
Read the paper. It will probably be in the supplementals.

>>15986792
I can't understand you when you try to talk with your mouth full of big oil's dick.

>>15987349
>Read it
>Probably
So you haven't even read it yourself, yet tell me to read it. Fuck off with this insincere time wasting trolling. That's a bannable offense.

>>15983358
>>15983362
>>15983390

Did you expect fossil-shill bots to understand what an average is? Their entire script of non-arguments boils down to them not understanding what an average is. It's always; "hur dur, it cold one day this winter," "hur dur, it cool one day on summer at one location," "hur dur, one location temperature trend no up last 3 years."

>>15987383
>Average is increasing
>variability is also increasing
>Error is also deceasing
Mathematically, literally no other systems follow this type of behavior. It's data tampering.

>>15987353
Take your meds, retard. Data acquisition is typically covered in the supplementals. You'd know this if you had any experience in academia or with scientific papers at all. Are you sperging out because you don't know how to find the supplementals? NGMI

>>15987383
The irony of this post is staggering.

>>15987387
>Mathematically, literally no other systems follow this type of behavior. It's data tampering.
No other systems huh? Argument from your ignorance? Usual bot tactic.
>mathematically
Lol. fuck outta here bot, with your buzzword bullshit.

>>15987388
>Typically
The point is you're telling me to read something while not having read it yourself. Then you're calling me a schizo for not believing you. It's okay to say you don't know, but I also recognize you feel like that weakens your arguments regarding climate change. After all, how dare you post an image that you're unable to explain specifics of? Better just tell someone to read a 71 page paper and assume where the information is located. Reflect on why this interaction has you so jolted.

>>15987395
Scientific analysis must follow mathematical modeling. Name one system (other than global warming) that satisfies the three criteria I explained. Better still, specify conditions under which the criteria are met via a symbol modeling.

>>15987399
So you have no experience with scientific papers whatsoever. Got it, faggot. Now get reading. All your questions will be answered, provided you can figure out how to pull up the supplementals. It should be trivial, but I just bet you won't be able to figure it out and then you'll whine that it's not as easy as watching a youtube video and demand to have your hand held. Like a little piss baby.

>>15987406
>All your questions will be answered,
How do you know that if you haven't read the paper? Why are you so upset?

>>15987407
>"Wah, WAH!"
Aw, what's wrong little piss baby? Are those tears or little drops of piss? Does piss baby need his hand held and his baba full of piss?

>>15987399
>rrrreeeeee! how dare you tell me to waste my time reading
>tells others to waste their time reading
Typical bot.

>>15986555
>>15984911

>>15986419
>>15984911

>>15986767
>>15984911

>>15987350
>>15984911

>>15987414
It's already been explained to you. They altered the data to fit their narrative at the behest and payment of oil companies. This is well documented.

>>15987408
>>15987413
Embarrassing. Do you see how you're losing ground here? Despite your best efforts, you cannot justify your claims and is why the amount of people doubting your manipulated data is increasing over time. You're losing control socially, mentally, emotionally and soon to be financially.

>>15987422
So did nasa.gov and they are financed by the same intersection of big oil lobbyists and politicians.

>>15987422
I think this one really fucks them up badly, normally they try and explain it away or gaslight but this is so damning they have to ignore it instead

>>15987437
>"WAH, WAH!"
Aw, what's wrong, little piss baby? Is reading too hard? Did you get piss all over yourself when you tried? That's okay little piss baby. Why don't you just watch the pissytubbies and suck on your pissifier?

>>15987440
Nonsense.

>>15987452
That's cognitive dissonance for you.

>>15987422
See >>15987502
Well, that simplifies things a lot.

>>15982432
> "climatologists" can't tell me whether it's going to rain tomorrow with better accuracy than a coin flip
> expected to believe that they have any idea what's going to happen to a much larger and much more complicated system in 50 years
k

>>15987514
Provide any evidence of your claims. Until you do your claims can be dismissed without need of argument.

>>15987526
>He doesn't know the difference between a climatologist and a meteorologist

>>15987534
Both are no better than tarot card readers.

>>15987541
Tarot seems more your speed anyways. You don't understand the difference between weather and climate.

>>15987544
You sound like a seething leftoid. Probably low T.

>>15987549
Why would I care what an idiot thinks? You can prove me wrong by explaining the difference between weather and climate. You can even use google. Give it a try.

>>15987559

>>15987563
0/10

>>15987530
As can yours. Are you seriously challenging the fact that big oil corporations funnel more money to members of the Congressional Budget and Appropriations Committees than they funnel to "think tanks" and "institutes"? Not to mention the lobbyists and legal firms who influence and write everything up. Or the agency directors who manage the appropriation once it's been passed? You're either underage or just an insincere asshole.

>>15987574
I've provided evidence of my claims. You still have not provided any evidence of yours. Why don't you have a look at the donations various congressmen receive from fossil fuel companies and compare that to their stance on climate change. Do you imagine there will be some correlation?

>>15987715
You've provided no evidence that your claim has any special merit. You won't for at least two reasons: 1) you're too lazy; 2) you're a literal child who thinks a politician's "stance on X" has any correlation to how they are compelled by party leadership to vote.

>>15987715
I don't need to provide counter evidence to point out how your evidence was manipulated. Your evidence should be rejected as farcical, and the default position to then take is the null hypothesis.

>>15987734
>>15987740
Take your meds and cope harder.

>>15987812
>Replies to his own comment
Good advice

>>15987818
Work on the reading comprehension. Adult illiteracy is pathetic.

>>15987833
Tell me about it.

Last years winter was colder but for some reason this one feels colder. I didn't feel this cold last year even though temperature wise it was colder.

>>15987526
> "statisticians" can't tell me whether my next coin flip is going to come up heads or tails
> expected to believe that they have any idea what's going to happen when the results of the "billion coin flip" experiment are in 50 years from now

>>15986573
>>15986419
Yeah because when that graph blatantly compares specific latitude temperatures to a global temperature model, like the following graph does, it’s actually malicious misinformation

>>15984668
>no! a dataset graphing website that has global warming in the title means that observations are fake :(

>>15988189
>>15988191

>>15987408
>>15987499
why do all the climate control shills have freudian meltdowns like this? it’s fascinating

>>15982432
if the globe is getting warmer how come this was the coldest winter huh? checkmate science fags

>>15988229
Because this winter’s heat spike was all localized deep in the ocean and is cooking the fish alive; the ocean will be completely lifeless by 2028 and we will all starve unless all industrialized countries except China dramatically cut back on carbon emission activities (private jet travel and transoceanic shipping to arbitrage environmental laws should still be okay).

This is actually the warmest winter for me

>>15988229
science has nothing to do with global worming hoax
If it was up to me, I would test everybody who is considered scientist if they believe or do not believe in global warming narrative, then I would fire everybody who said they do, and would incarcerate those who promoted that shit the most.

>>15988182
>"billion coin flip" experiment
The what?

>>15988214
I noticed it too. They'll cite long documents, images, and more. When you start probing it, they'll jump to insults and assume you're stupid. When you prove you're not, and prove you not only understand what's going on but also doubt to, they have biblical tier meltdowns. I don't fully understand it, but I concur that's it's fascinating to see.

We are truly fucked. It has never been this bad and it’ll only get worse. I hope at least the carcass of this world will live on

>>15988229
Have you seen a seesaw in motion? What happens after it swings one way?

>>15989325
>carcass of this world
Not directed at you in particular, just a tangent.

Since this thread is full of advanced climate physicists, does anyone know if we currently have the technology to fracture the earth into maybe five or six large wedges (and a bunch of smaller shards and debris) by drilling into the core very precisely and nuking it in just the right way? If so, what would happen to the wedges? Would they sort of continue to orbit together like floating cliffs? Where would the water end up? And could we reassemble it all into two new spheres that are each identical to the original earth?

>>15989345
> the climate has the dynamics of a seesaw

>>15989361
>physics only applies to one thing

>>15989348
No, the gravity of such a situation is infeasible even if it were able to be accomplished (it's not)

>>15989364
What do you mean by the gravity is unfeasible?

>>15989376
Do you know enough about gravity to understand my response, were it developed? Because based on my literal reading of your question you seem to be under the impression you could divide a planet into "wedges", have them orbit "together", conserve the atmosphere and fluids of the wedges, actually dislodge them from each other with "nukes", and other ideas that suggest you haven't studied the topic of gravity and orbitals at all, much less how these exotic situations would be constrained.

>>15989386
If you can describe the exotica in terms of tensors, sure, I'm good with that.

>>15984333
law

>>15988214
>>15988315
Why can't deniers read? What are the chances that every single one of you is illiterate?

>>15989538
>What are the chances that every single one of you is illiterate?
Surely you mean "are illiterate".

>>15989604
Nope. "Every single one" changes the subject from the group to the individuals on that group singly.

>Mary dropped a basket of eggs and now every single one is cracked
Correct

>>Mary dropped a basket of eggs and now every single one are cracked
Incorrect.

Now that you've demonstrated that you are illiterate can you tell me why?

>>15989538
i read a bunch of baby talk about piss. what else do you see here?
>>15988189
>>15988191

>>15989654
>every single one of you is
your grammar is correct here fyi

>>15989538
why would we read your unfounded conspiracy theories that haven't played out over the decades?

we're done with your pretend crisis, everyone knows science is wrong and also gay now. get educated, bigot.

>>15989654
ESL?
>>15989665
No it isn't. Enter it into chatgpt if you don't believe me.

>>15989659
Did you read that study? No? Is it because you're illiterate? Yes? Thought so.

>>15989690
You're wrong. It's okay, you're just illiterate. You are right to feel ashamed, but it's not the end of the world. You can improve your literacy. Why don't you start with some Amelia Bedelia books and when you feel comfortable with those you can try something a little more advanced.

>>15989669
Take your meds.

>>15989748
ESL? Meds.

>>15989801
People will not take you seriously if you don't improve your literacy. 'Every single egg are broken' is not a proper sentence. It points out your lack of education and makes you sound like a hick.

>>15989819
>Every single egg are broken' is not a proper sentence.
Nobody said it was. Take your meds.

>>15989538
Two thing you have to consider:
in general:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL6-x0modwY
in particular:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rziqjEzbOdE

>>15989690
>chatgpt
dumb motherfucker
>>15989739
lol tell me more about your piss fantasy, psycho

>>15989762
meds are for trannies. I don't have to tell you to take yours. just go do it on reddit, thanks.

>>15986391
Pre-2016 RSS is proven false, by the guys that run the RSS satellites.
https://youtu.be/LiZlBspV2-M?t=3m40s

>>15989856
See
>>15989604
>>15989690
>>15989801

If Amelia Bedelia isn't your thing then you could try Pipi Longstocking.

>>15989961
Tell me more about how you're incapable of reading.

>>15990151
Meds.

>>15990310
MAFT

>>15982432
The US is not the only country in the world, anon. put a pot of water on the stove to heat up, and you'll still find a patch of water that's cold. NA is a naturally temperate region.

>>15990248
>We didn't make a mistake, our "Science" just improved!

>>15990340
>i can't read
what else is new

>>15990307
Eggs aren't mentioned in any of those three linked posts. Are you legitimately schizophrenic? I say this with sincerity: seek a psychiatrist and take your meds.

>>15990309
pretty sure a random baby could read (and write) at your level
>>15988189
>>15988191

>>15990309
pretty sure a random baby could read (and write) at your level
>>15987408
>>15987499

>>15983392
This anon gets it

>>15983230
it's so hot everywhere else in the world, that when it IS cold it feels a lot colder.

>>15982476
fpbp
Data itself shows a slightly higher extremes(in 1C range) for both heath and cold, yet it's the subjective opinion of people, most who forget yesterdays hardship when presented with a new one today, that allows the acceptance that we are hitting 'extremes' when told by the media.

>>15990820
>Data itself
lol

>>15990534
Then why haven't you read that study? What reason would you have to not read that study besides inability to do so? You're illiterate. I'd bet you read at about a first grade level and you are embarrassed that you can't sound out all the words on a page in under an hour. This is why I keep telling you to try reading Amelia Bedelia, but maybe you'd prefer Curious George.

>>15990443
Those posts all assert that "every single egg are cracked" is the proper English and "every single egg is cracked" is not, which is wrong. I know you're embarrassed that you don't even understand the language you were born speaking, but you could try harder.

>>15990917
>Those posts all assert that "every single egg are cracked" is the proper English and "every single egg is cracked" is not, which is wrong.
Those posts don't say anything about eggs

>>15990912
i'm not the same anon who collapsed you into a freudian infancy but it's very clear you're the one who can't read his own "sources"
>>15987437
>15987408
>15987413
>Embarrassing. Do you see how you're losing ground here? Despite your best efforts, you cannot justify your claims and is why the amount of people doubting your manipulated data is increasing over time. You're losing control socially, mentally, emotionally and soon to be financially.

>>15991136
So you haven't read the study because you're illiterate. Thanks for confirming that.

>>15990934
Try reading the posts they respond to, you illiterate retard.

>>15991299
boring. more piss spazzing please

>>15991509
Treat your ADHD

>>15991532
treat your urinary incontinence lol

>>15991571
Treat your illiteracy

>>15992352
ladies first

>>15992364
Your illiteracy is on you, champ. Stop making lame excuses for why you're bringing down the literacy rate.

>>15992442
no, it's on you. you told another anon to read something, then had a baby piss meltdown after you couldn't read your own thing. lmao

>>15987399

>>15984652
>it's climate change, chud.

>Scientists lie to me about race not existing
>Scientists lie to me about mentally ill men in dresses being women
>But they're 100% telling the truth about climate change!
Hmm, nah, I'll continue buying combustion engine cars

>>15987499
>>15987408
Unironically actually mindbroken lmfao

>>15994173
correct, that type of rhetoric can only be produced by an emotionally disturbed mind which is still fixed on childhood despite being chronologically an adult

>>15986621
>status quo
the status quo is regulation and taxes on everyione except billionaires.
you have to be 18 to post here

>>15986646
>limit warmng to 2C
you realize we cannot change this

>>15994173
Climate control shills are (empirically) prone to psychosexual infantilism
>>>/sci/thread/14698736#p14705124
and as you can see, 2022 is tepid compared to 2024.
"piss" 9 times in 2 posts. It's fascinating.
A pot of useful frogs being cooked to death slowly (and not by the climate).

>>15989348
dont listen to this retard>>15989364
if the earth split it would just collapse back into a ball killing everyone

>>15982432
>this winter is the coldest I have ever experienced.

East coast here. Winter has been unseasonably warm this year.
This cold winter thing OP's talking about sounds like a (you) problem. I don't have to shovel snow anymore!! Why would I want to shovel snow??

>>15982432
>this winter is the coldest I have ever experienced.

East coast here. Winter has been one of the warmest I've seen in my lifetime. I don't have to shovel snow anymore!!
This cold winter thing OP's talking about sounds like a (you) problem. Why would I want to shovel snow??

>>15992451
I've been through it. Have you read it? Has he? No? Why? Because you're both illiterate? Or is there some other reason that both of you have for refusing to read it?

>>15994589
>been through it
Odd choice of words. Weird way to say you didn't read it..

>>15994777
kek

>>15982508
You need to believe in the words of priests, I mean scientists.

>>15994777
So you still haven't read it? After almost a week? It must suck to be illiterate. Unless you have some other explanation for why you haven't read it?

>>15994209
Not with the status quo. That's the issue.

>>15983316
>>15983293
>>15983322
>>15983335
>>15983340
>>15983382
>>15983488
>>15986385
>>15986589
>>15986697
>>15986704
Propaganda, trash tier propaganda on top of that. Nothing but well known scammers, liars, and incompetent morons.
Science wins again, globohomo climate cultists lose as always.
/thread

>>15994173
>>15994200
>>15994215
What sensitive little bitches. You can't be bothered to read a source you asked for and then whine that you're being trolled on 4chan because you refuse to read? Normally I'd say "go back to redit", but I think redit might be too mean and scary of a place for such delicate little snowflakes.

Go back to twitter and facebook.

>>15995113
Take your meds.

>>15995117
NO

>>15995115
i'm encouraged to see that you haven't skipped your meds in the last few days. maybe there's still hope for the "baby piss" shills after all

>>15995159
If you're too sensitive to handle trolling then why did you come to 4chan, snowflake?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDq_8y_drE8
How much do you think it will take to make this guy whimper and cry like a little girl whose father is fucking her in the ass?

>>15995166
that's all you lol, i'm not the one who can't read his own sources and emotionally collapses into a pool of "baby piss"

>>15995175
I've read the source. Have you? No? Because you're illiterate? Great. So that means my time is better spent insulting you. Notice that the poster I called a piss baby left and never came back.

>>15995430
you haven't >>15994589

>>15995430
Scrolling from top to bottom while reading the table of contents isn't reading the paper. You "went through it" yet expect others to read it instead of "going through it". Why the double standard?

>>15982432

EVERY one in a hundred years weather event is blamed on Global warming... sorry... global climate change

>>15995487
>>15995695
So neither of you have read it, even after six days. Why should I do anything other than mock you and make you feel uncomfortable?

>>15995773
You misunderstood. You're being milked for lulz.

>>15995773
>i can't read my own source
fixed it for you

>>15995781
>>15996269
So you have nothing to offer and my time would be better spent calling you piss babies. See how your refusal to participate leads to a lower quality of dialogue? You can whine about it all you want, but at the end of the day you're still the one who couldn't be bothered to read and respond to a study.

Because you're widdle piss babies.

>>15996397
says the guy who couldn't be bothered to read and respond to a study

>>15996411
I have read it and I don't need to respond to it because I'm not the one asking for a source and it corroborates my claims. You need to read and respond to the study instead of pissing and shitting yourself while demanding that someone holds your hand and changes your stinky diaper. That's how this works. If you're too illiterate, or simply refuse, to read and respond the sources you demand then you have conceded the argument and I can insult and abuse you as much as I please. Now, have you read that study? No? Do you have an argument to present? No?

That's because you're a drooling little piss baby waving a pissy teether around.

>>15996439
it's obvious you haven't and also obvious you wouldn't even understand it if you did

>>15986420
Kys antisemite

>>15996456
Textbook projection from a textbook piss baby. Come back when you're ready to read like an adult.

>>15996480
not until you read the study

>>15996488
I'm waiting on you to read it, piss baby. It's been a week. Plenty of time to read a single study for any adult. Too bad you spent all this time pissing all over yourself because you don't know how to read.

>>15996819
i see you still didn't read the study

>>15995720
global warming isn't real and there is no evidence you're doing anything whatsoever to improve anything, instead you're greedily hogging up resources unnecessarily and wasting them on a nonexistent made up problem.

>>15996861
I see you're still an illiterate piss baby. Why don't you get an adult to read it to you?

>>15997462
Take your meds

>>15997520
>>15997522

>>15997650
You still haven't read anything. It's been more than a week and now this thread has hit bump limit. As far as any debate or argument goes you have completely failed.

>>15998071
i'm ready if you get around to reading the study