3 ms·

yeah the author isn't very credible but the data is sourced and the point seems to stand as far as I can tell. The sources do not seem to be contested as far a

• gruez 6y ago
  >but the data is sourced and the point seems to stand as far as I can tell. Doesn't that describe most pseudoscience/conspiracy posts though? They rarely make up data outright, but instead they cherrypick data that fits their theory. This is why I asked if this theory was already a thing before the pandemic. If it's really the case that China (or any other major emitter) is underreporting their emissions, you'd think that someone at a reputable institution would have raised the alarm about the inconsistency in the past two decades. The lack of this is a reason to doubt the validity of this, at least to a casual observer. With regards to actual explanations, the twitter thread provides many: * chinese new year * sanctions/tariffs * different style of lockdown by china vs the US
  • toolz 6y ago
    conspiracy theory? As I understand it this is merely measuring data and comparing it to previous measurements. Either the data is wrong or it isn't - there's no need to complicate things with conspiracy theories or anything else
• nicoburns 6y ago
  It seems to me that the US never actually shutdown in the way that China did. So it's unsurprising that it didn't affect CO2 levels in the same way.