4 ms·
Isn't it the case that the global temperatures are stubbornly refusing to match the (increasingly bonkers) rhetoric? Perhaps that's the reason for warmists digg
by an9n 5y ago
Isn't it the case that the global temperatures are stubbornly refusing to match the (increasingly bonkers) rhetoric? Perhaps that's the reason for warmists digging their heels in even further, censoring dissent etc.
- anonymousab 5y ago> Isn't it the case that the global temperatures are stubbornly refusing to match the (increasingly bonkers) rhetoric Correct, they are in fact worse than most calculations, in terms of absolute values and acceleration. It turns out that we are not being pessimistic and scared enough.
- EricE 5y agoAnd yet the Obama's just built a mutli-million dollar mansion in Martha's Vineyard - at sea level. Obama is a climate denier?
- namdnay 5y agothis one? https://vineyardgazette.com/sites/default/files/article-assets/main-photos/2019/obama-marthasvineyard-house.jpg https://vineyardgazette.com/sites/default/files/article-asse... if sea levels rise by two feet he'll lose a bit of land around the edges, but it's hardly "at sea level"
- rocgf 5y agoNo, it's not the case.
- mrjangles 5y agoThat was the case 10 years ago, but since then they have discovered that all the temperature records since 1950 were wrong, and they have been correcting them. Turns out the computer simulations were correct all along and it was the data that was wrong. This guy has been digging up old NASA publications showing what they claimed, in 2000, that the temperature was between 1950-2000 and what they claim today that the temperature was between 1950-2000. https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/spectacularly-poor-climate-science-at-nasa/ https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/spectacularly-poor-clima...
- EricE 5y agoChanging the data to match religious dogma rather than actual science. What a surprise. Waiting for the inevitable ad hominem attack on the source vs. a discussions of the facts he presents.