I didn’t suggest that I’m superior to you in every sense, just certain aspects of intellect. You might well be superior to me in other areas. That’s life. Get used to it.
There‘s probably billions of people who are far smarter than I am, you’re just not one of them in one particular area of what...
Here‘s nearly 50 years of modelling that has repeatedly worked.
You‘ll notice that the more recent models predict the change more accurately and also predict history quite nicely.
Thats why the scientists involved are still arguing over the exact figure for climate sensitivity, and nearly every other component. Eg. Is the figure for X 4.37 or 4.34?
What they aren’t doing now is arguing about the larger picture, because there is no argument that can be had...
Was that the scientific consensus of the time or the rantings from the fringe?
You seem unable to separate what is accepted because it’s been supprted
Oh dear. You’re now in a new realm of scientific misunderstanding.
THEORIES aren’t LAWS.
LAWS sometimes form a PART of a THEORY.
Didn’t we go through the arsenic analogy already?
Your basic assumption that GHG’s are the sole cause of heat, which it would need to be in order for the percentages you’re quoting to even make any sense whatsoever, is fatally flawed.
If I drop arsenic into a glass of water at a 1:100 ratio...
I’d suggest you read this and take specific note of those clouds and water vapour that you keep telling us the models don’t account for.
The accuracy they’ve been getting for 50 years is quite amazing. Especially when you consider that we know a lot more now than we did 50 years ago.
Wait...not that long ago you were stating that the Earths climate has always changed.
Surely we could use that information to make predictions for both the Earths history and it’s future (With a certain degree of uncertainty of course)?
The real beauty of the bell-curve of IQ distribution when combined with a relatively large population is that the US will frequently produce some of the brightest minds on the planet. The drawback is that the US will also produce imbeciles in the roughly the same proportion.
America: We sent...
No scientific theory is EVER ”proven”. You keep showing us that you don’t even understand the methodology correctly.
Why should I care what you think about a methodology when you can’t even accurately describe it?
Every scientific theory is open to new evidence that might refute it.
I’m still trying to work out the relevance to the topic of “science is cancelled”.
You are one super-weird dude.
I apogise for assuming your gender.
Given that you consistently fail to make any sort of attempt to reply to my questions, I thought I’d share a meme. Seems that at least one of the...
My apologies, I didn’t realise I was on trial here. Good to see that you’ve appointed yourself to a position where you think I care about your demands. Looks like an inflated sense of self-worth to me. Narcissism perhaps?
It would be appreciated if you could at least consistently follow your...
Indeed, but in the minds of those who think in black and white, good and evil, if something is even vaguely harmful, it must be entirely harmful.
”Masks don’t work” = “because they don’t offer 100% protection, they’re entirely useless.“
”Scientists are always wrong” = “because mistakes are...