Is "climate science" really science? They don't do any double blind studies and they possess no predictive power
It's a science in the same way that "computer science" is
>>16293933How on earth would you do a double blind study on something like the climate (which is by definition many year-long averages in global scale weather in a region). Double blind RCT kind of studies are great for things like medicine or exercise science where you're trying to isolate a particular causal factor in a multifactorial process. It's basically impossible with something like climate.
>>16293933>They don't do any double blind studiesI can't tell if these threads are made by bots or nolifers, but you guys are funny
>>16293933THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED!What part of settled do you not understand?You don't get to question it anymore.END OF DISCUSSION.
>>16293938>How on earth would you do a double blind studyYou cant dipshit, that is the point
>>16293945Ah, so your point is that you think "science == double blind study" even when that's a completey retarded standard that doesn't even make sense? Do you ask civil engineers to do double blind studies on structural failures for bridges too?
>>16293950Yes. Astronomy isn't a real science either sweety
>>16293933Climate is all about the arriving glacial period.Temperature increase-> heat gradient between equator-north pole fades -> Gulfstream diminishes (measurable) -> area supporting snowfall grows -> snow reflects sunlight -> cooling accelerates -> glaciers formSave your money. >muh CO2 o, unfortunately. A lot of atmospheric CO2 will get diluted in the water around the glaciers and get photosynthsized by algea, eventually turning to oil again.The Anthropocene is OVER!
climate deniers eat tomatoes
about a team of researchers studying dinoflagellate cyst fossils:>By analyzing the fossils in different layers of the sediments, the team reconstructed the “paleoclimate” of southern Italy between about 200 B.C.E. and C.E. 600, with a resolution of roughly three years.The reconstructions show that cooler periods—which had average temperatures as much as three degrees Celsius lower than the highs of preceding centuries for decades at a time—coincided with Roman reports of major pandemicsclimate change killed the roman empire
>>16293933Why are you posting a twitter screenshot from someone roleplaying the matrix?
>>16294313why does this thread upset you so badly?
>>16293950Don't bother, the Anon you replied two has two working brain cells at best. While one is highly occupied trying to falsely comprehend information, the other is touching his sensitive parts
>>16293933>The architect>Guy from The Matrix>Being a pseudWhy is X (formerly Twitter) so cringe? Can science explain this phenomenon?
>>16294315I don't care about this thread. I just want to know why you're using a screenshot from someone pretending to be a character from a cringy movie.
>>16295278this thread clearly upsets you, why are you trying to deny that? your emotional distress is made readily apparent by the language you choose to use
>>16295660I think you're projecting, and I'm not that anon. Very defensive, repeating the same "insult."
>>16293933>possess no predictive powerhmm, it's been predicted for decades that average global temperatures would rise.Are you trolling, or are you ignorant?
>>16295757>hmm, it's been predicted for decades that average global temperatures would rise.seriously, OP, are you trolling, or are you ignorant?
>>16295757>>16295758or are you getting paid by somebody to disinform others, OP?Which one is it?
>>16294626>replied twopottery, stfu retard
>>16293941this!How dare you question our experts?!?! They said they know everything and they posted it on x and facebook, so it must be real! You're racist if you don't agree
>>16294278it's actually much worse than "climate". All cultures are very clear about what happened back then, but most people are too stupid to pay attention and believe the reality. This is why history is so messed up and makes no sense if you look at the mainstream version objectively.
>>16293938>How on earth would you do a double blind study on something like the climateYou cant, hence climate science is not science.
>>16293950The standard is the scientific method. No one said it was easy or doable every time, if you cant do an experiment because hard, then it isnt science. Theres no bending of the rules when it gets hard
>>16296412>standard is the scientific methodWhat is the "scientific method"? Don't use something that's debunked like falsifactionism or whatever
>>16295758systemic error in measurement. If each of these were really the hottest we would see secondary and tertiary indicators. You would see rainfall records also being broken, you don't. You would see increased natural disasters, you don't. You would see increase global vegetation, you don't. Just a lot of people screaming that it will happen. Soon_tm
Holy shit, just shoot up some satellites that block 1% of the light coming to earth and be done with it. Fucking retards. It won't be more than $10 trillion which will be way less than <10% of earths gpd by the time it's actually done. This is a literal non-problem.
>>16293933>Is "fluid dynamics" really science? >Is "complex systems" really science?>Is "computational physics" really science?>Is "chemistry" really science?If yes, then "climate science" is really a science
>>16295660I am that anon and you're definitely projecting. Did you want to answer the question?
>>16297219Retard.
>>16298479>cherry picking a single date >even waiting to cherry pick the coldest day of the summer you can't crack the top ten records for that date>meanwhile June 2024 was the hottest June on record for the globe and for most individual countries
