3 ms·
> “but it snowed massively at N event, thus climate change is expected variance and false” A lot of confusion in those comment could be cleared up by agreeing
by yongjik 4y ago
> “but it snowed massively at N event, thus climate change is expected variance and false”
A lot of confusion in those comment could be cleared up by agreeing on this one simple fact:
CLIMATE CHANGE IS HAPPENING. We already know it, and it doesn't need to be proven again, because IT'S ALREADY PROVEN, beyond any reasonable doubt.
(Sorry for yelling.)
In other words, it's not like asking "Can we say the dice is loaded because we got three consecutive sixes?" It's more like asking, "OK, we know the dice is loaded, we understand the basic mechanism behind it, we even know who did it, and now we just got three consecutive sixes from this known loaded dice. What does it mean?"
- hnfong 4y ago"OK, we know the dice is loaded, we understand the basic mechanism behind it, we even know who did it, and now we just got three consecutive sixes from this known loaded dice. What does it mean?" Probably not much if the premise is true. In which case bringing up such news basically invites those knee-jerk responses like “but it snowed massively at N event, thus climate change is expected variance and false”