/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15993560
Why is water wet?
They're useful idiots for commies, what did you expect from them OP?

>>15993560
Not sure but if you keep asking this question, the online dictionaries will just update their definitions to the current truth.

>>15993560
Because there is a worldwide Judeo-Masonic conspiracy to make the public believe in climate change. Is that the answer you wanted to hear? Go back to your containment board

>>15993560
It's called "weather" when it's a single event and "climate" when it's a long average of weather. How can retards not know this?

>journalism
Any further questions? Proper scientists might do some attribution studies to understand how likely an event would have been with/without climate change.

>>15993570
Was the heatwave last summer significantly longer than the recent cold wave?

>>15993572
2023 was the hottest year on record so yes.

>>15993595
That wasn't the question.

>>15993597
The question was retarded. If heat waves normally last 2 days and cold waves last 2 weeks, then a 5-day heat wave would still be shorter than a 1-week cold wave, even though both would indicate a deviation from the norm in the same direction.

>>15993597
I answered the question though.

>>15993602
If it's 30 degrees below average for 2 weeks versus 10 degrees above average for 2 days how is that the same amount of deviation?
>>15993603
The question referenced the weather/climate event in OP, which is unrelated to your current talking point you're trying to shoehorn in.

>>15993605
>If it's 30 degrees below average for 2 weeks versus 10 degrees above average for 2 days how is that the same amount of deviation?
But it wasn't, it was hotter, longer which is why it was the hottest year on record. If it was cold it would have been cold but it wasn't

>>15993560
The climate this winter has been exceptionally warm. The weather tomorrow in my area will be warmer than usual for this time of year. I blame El Nino

>>15993608
>if I keep spamming it maybe someone will care

>>15993611
You asked a question but refused to accept the answer, refusing more won't change that.

>>15993613
On the assumption that that's "the answer" then how did NYT know about it in July?

>>15993620
Know what? Can you quote a specific part you disagree with?

>>15993621
Know that 2023 would be the hottest year on record.

Followup question: Why didn't they mention that in their fear-porn article then instead of basing it all on a brief weather event?

>>15993625
Where do they say that? Again please quote the section.

>>15993631

>>15993637
That happened before that article was written.

>>15993638
Correct. Further evidence that they don't actually have a time machine and so couldn't possibly have been referring to 2023 allegedly being the hottest year on record like you claim.

>>15993642
Where do I claim that?

>>15993625
Why are you so obsessed with a news website? This is a science board, not "let's discuss last year's newspaper". Fuck off to your containment board.

>>15993643
>>15993595

>>15993645
2023 was the hottest year on record. I didn't say the article said it was. Do you have reading comprehension issues?

>>15993644
Media outlets like the NYT are a critical part of the climate fear industry.

>>15993647
Ah, my bad then. I assumed you were trying to say something relevant to the discussion instead of just shitting up any thread with "climate" in the OP with irrelevant canned talking points.

jews

>>15993649
I answered your question, I assumed that when you asked a question and I answered, you would think I would be answering your question when I explicitly stated I was doing so.

>>15993651
My question clearly referenced the heat wave referenced in the article, which couldn't possibly have any relation to what you're talking about (absent time travel). Perhaps you're the one with reading comprehension issues?

>>15993653
Yes so was my answer.

>>15993656
2023 couldn't possibly have been "the hottest year on record" (allegedly) until January 1, 2024. Do you also need a refresher on how time works?

>>15993657
It's 24.1.2024, january 1 was 2 weeks ago.

>>15993659

(...also that's more than 3 weeks. Add math to the lesson plan.)

>>15993660
Where did Mr. Yuhas claim that 2023 was the hottest year on record?

>>15993671
That was you, anon. Are you feeling ok?

>>15993673
It wasn't me, it was another anon. And he made that claim on January 24th. Why are you posting this screenshot then? >>15993660

>>15993675
He deflected from the point of the thread by claiming the "heat wave" in the article was actually all of 2023.

>>15993676
I answered your question, were you trying to make a point? Can you put the point into words perhaps?

>>15993681
If that was your answer you didn't understand the question.

>>15993684
You asked a yes/no question and I answered yes.

>>15993686
That doesn't mean you understood the question, it just means you understood it was a yes/no question.

>>15993688
I did understand it and the answer is yes. What's the problem?

>>15993690
Your answer was that a heat wave mentioned in a news article from July 2023 was actually a reference to the entire year of 2023, despite the non-existence of time travel and the specific narrow timeframe explicitly given in the article text.

>>15993693
There you go sperging out again, please point out where I said any of that.

>>15993696
>>15993595

>>15993699
Reading comprehension issues again? That doesn't say what you claim it says, try again please.

>>15993703
If you're claiming it was an answer to the question you were replying to then it does.

>>15993710
Now you are just being psychotic, try to calm down and read the post again.

>>15993713
I'm just drawing logical conclusions based on your identification of a heat wave mentioned in an article from july with literally all of 2023. Tbh I'm being generous, as the alternatives are that you have no capacity for logical thought and/or you're not actually trying to answer the question at all and are just trying to spam the "2023 was the hottest year evar!!" talking point into as many threads as possible.

>>15993719
You can't even read a basic answer to a yes/no question, you ought to stop what ever schizo magic you think you are doing and learn English first.

>>15993723
I read it just fine. Now I'm trying to psychoanalyze what mental defect(s) led you to write it.

>>15993724
Led me to answer yes to a yes/no question?

>>15993726
It was more about the justification given than the "Yes" itself.

>>15993572
It doesn't matter which happened for longer. Both are weather. You understand that "cold wave" is from the polar vortex destabilizing, right?

>>15993728
Why do you lie? See
>>15993597
You claim that yes is not an answer to yes/no question

>>15993560
that's like asking a christian to explain the trinity
https://www.bitchute.com/video/8AHkAJrpAxd4/

>>15993595
Doesn't follow

>>15993572
>>15993595
>is an orange significanly bigger than an apple?
>orange juice futures hit an all time high last year so yes
the absolute state of climate control shills

>>15993560
The funny thing is this is only the beginning. Thic coming summer will be even WORSE. In fact it will get even hotter for the foreseeable future. Makes you wonder exactly when it will get too hot to sustain human society.

>>15993849
>Thic coming summer
sounds nsfw, what's the plotline?

the last ice age in europe was around 14,000 years ago, right? isn't it a good thing that the earth has been heating up?
sure, some countries like the netherlands might sink. but so what? they can migrate elsewhere. you're not anti-migration, are you? are you a racist?

>>15993853
Kek, way to derail the conversation. Just pointing out that this is the new normal, so get used to it.

The confounder to the reported increase in forest fires, especially in California, is that fuel has been building up because small fires are immediately put out. Prescribed burns are not tolerated since it reduces air quality, and people get scared if it gets out of control.

It should also be noted that Californian ecology literally evolved to be on fire, with many seeds being fire activated and adapted to thrive after an area has burned through.

If the climate gets too hot we can always use stratospheric aerosols to reflect a small fraction of sunlight and reduce the amount of solar irradiation.

Regarding droughts, it could be possible to perform cloud seeding over the oceans to increase the amount of rainfall on land. This would actually increase the overall moisture in the air as clouds increase the efficiency of extracting water from the oceans, in contrast to the zero sum situation cloud seeding over land which only expels existing moisture.

>>15993849
kys

we had the coldest winter in a hundred years in my country and people think the globe is heating up.
we also had an extremely cold summer.
people say it's about averages but it looks cold on average

>>15993560
Basic bitch propaganda.

>>15993609
Where the fuck do you live, Australia? It sure as hell hasn't been in North America.

>>15993560
Why is it "sex" when I do it but "gay sex" when OP does it?

>>15993609