3 ms·
Gave it about 5 minutes, left me with a strong crackpot energy, even with the disclaimer a little bit in. The length seems to affect the authors ability to mak
by refulgentis 3y ago
Gave it about 5 minutes, left me with a strong crackpot energy, even with the disclaimer a little bit in.
The length seems to affect the authors ability to make a cohesive argument, even when I set my bias against length aside.
I closed the tab after I saw the claim its the only way to explain increased CO2 PPM during [March / April 2020].
Figure 1A is "substantial jump in carbon ppm each year from 15 Feb through 1 Apr when the sun increases its heat contribution"
- LatteLazy 3y agoIt's horrendously long and bad. I tried to read it once. I don't get why people deny climate change, it's not like we're even doing anything to stop it for them to actually complain about...
- ChatGTP 3y agoi think it’s mostly out of fragility, fear and denial. It’s so much easier to put your head in the sand.
- jboggan 3y agoSure, I felt similarly when I read it 3 years ago. But the problem is that there is not a single atmospheric model that can explain the magnitude, rapidity, and localization of the current warming. This does all three and I don't see why the mechanism for it is impossible. The fact that Antarctic sea ice is plummeting when there hasn't been any significant atmospheric warming at the South Pole is remarkable and deserves a lot of scrutiny. And figure 1A is referring to the heat contribution to the Northern hemisphere where the vast majority of seasonal CO2 landmass sequestration occurs. The author isn't saying the sun gets hotter in March.