4 ms·

I gave my evidence in the two URLs to YC here, and those two have more good references, including some of the best. I'm just a private citizen with no more ski

I gave my evidence in the two URLs to YC here, and those two have more good references, including some of the best. I'm just a private citizen with no more skin in this game than anyone else, so I'm objective, open minded, and willing to learn. So, of your "overwhelming" evidence, of which I claim there is none that is significant, let's see your three strongest. By the way: I totally debunked the main piece of evidence, Al Gore's graph of CO2 and temperature from ice cores going back ~800,000 years. Next, to be science, it has to make accurate predictions, and the predictions were among the worst in the history of science -- wildly wrong. Good science predicted black holes, the neutrino, and the Higgs boson and from some group theory and quantum mechanics can predict the spectral lines of molecules, but the climate science couldn't get future temperatures even close to right. I gave the reverence. Pictures of swimming polar bears is not good evidence. Pictures of Arctic ice melting in September is not good evidence; I want to see pictures of Arctic ice, wind velocities, and wind temperatures in February. Pictures of coral reefs are a terrible way to measure temperature. When I was at the US National Bureau of Standards, we routinely measured temperatures to 0.01 C. Generally we can measure temperature quite accurately; pictures of coral reefs can't compete. Pictures of glaciers meeting the sea are not good evidence. Pictures of some one particular glacier in Greenland melting are not good evidence. We HAD CO2 concentrations go up from 1940 to 1970, and temperatures went down, and that contradicts that higher CO2 concentrations yield higher temperatures. I gave the reference to MIT's Professor R. Lindzen's comment that the warming since 1900 cannot be CO2 warming. Droughts, animal deaths, COVID-19 are not good measurements of temperature. Now, you do have three good pieces of solid scientific evidence for human sources of CO2 causing significant global warming?

eloff 6y ago
I could come up with 300 given enough time. But it's not my job to convince people who are unable to evaluate evidence rationally. You can't cherry pick three things out of three hundred. All your objections are strawmen - nobody claims a picture of a melting glacier is evidence of climate change. Now the satelite data showing Greenland and Antarctica losing ice at an unprecedented rate is good evidence. I want to say just take an honest look at the whole of the evidence, not just things that agree with your bias. I don't think you will though. Good luck with that attitude with anything in life - it has a way of punishing people whose mental model of the world drifts too far from reality.
- throwaway294 6y ago
  You attacked me, your up and down. A local community college, when the epidemic is over, should be able to give you a course in remedial reading sufficient for you to read and understand my posts I referenced. For your 300 pieces of evidence, I asked for only three. So, you were unable to give even three and, instead, attacked my "rationality". Rationality? I hold a Ph.D. in applied math from a world class research university, and have published peer reviewed research in several technical area. Let's see your three best pieces of evidence.
  - eloff 6y ago
    So much for academia. I'm a college drop out, but I've still got you beat on the subject of rationality. I would like to point out I'm not the one hiding behind a throwaway. Maybe you are just trolling. You could literally read on the subject for months. There's an abundance of evidence and it's not hidden. https://lmgtfy.com/?q=resources+for+climate+change+deniers https://lmgtfy.com/?q=resources+for+climate+change+deniers
  - avmich 6y ago
    So, how do you explain scientific consensus on climate crisis?
    - throwaway294 6y ago
      MIT Professor R. Lindzen explains the consensus in "The Great Global Warming Swindle" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg The explanation is in one word -- money, as in two words, too much money. In addition, look at the arguments. Since I hold a good STEM field Ph.D., I'm supposed to do that. For more, I gave my explanations in the two URLs to YC I mentioned above.
      - eloff 6y ago
        Wow, how does one achieve this level of self-deception? Can this power be used for good as well as evil?

eloff 6y ago

I could come up with 300 given enough time. But it's not my job to convince people who are unable to evaluate evidence rationally. You can't cherry pick three things out of three hundred. All your objections are strawmen - nobody claims a picture of a melting glacier is evidence of climate change. Now the satelite data showing Greenland and Antarctica losing ice at an unprecedented rate is good evidence. I want to say just take an honest look at the whole of the evidence, not just things that agree with your bias. I don't think you will though. Good luck with that attitude with anything in life - it has a way of punishing people whose mental model of the world drifts too far from reality.

throwaway294 6y ago
You attacked me, your up and down. A local community college, when the epidemic is over, should be able to give you a course in remedial reading sufficient for you to read and understand my posts I referenced. For your 300 pieces of evidence, I asked for only three. So, you were unable to give even three and, instead, attacked my "rationality". Rationality? I hold a Ph.D. in applied math from a world class research university, and have published peer reviewed research in several technical area. Let's see your three best pieces of evidence.
- eloff 6y ago
  So much for academia. I'm a college drop out, but I've still got you beat on the subject of rationality. I would like to point out I'm not the one hiding behind a throwaway. Maybe you are just trolling. You could literally read on the subject for months. There's an abundance of evidence and it's not hidden. https://lmgtfy.com/?q=resources+for+climate+change+deniers https://lmgtfy.com/?q=resources+for+climate+change+deniers
- avmich 6y ago
  So, how do you explain scientific consensus on climate crisis?
  - throwaway294 6y ago
    MIT Professor R. Lindzen explains the consensus in "The Great Global Warming Swindle" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg The explanation is in one word -- money, as in two words, too much money. In addition, look at the arguments. Since I hold a good STEM field Ph.D., I'm supposed to do that. For more, I gave my explanations in the two URLs to YC I mentioned above.
    - eloff 6y ago
      Wow, how does one achieve this level of self-deception? Can this power be used for good as well as evil?