Liquid-in-glass thermometers too imprecise to detect global temperature trend since 1850.Margin of error for average global temp 1900-2010 (3.84°C) is 4.5x larger than claimed warming of 0.86°C. https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/23/13/5976
THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED! YOU WILL COMPLY!
>mdpihttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPI#Evaluation_and_controversieshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_publishingtake your cringe and go back to /pol/m, faggot.
>>16525999Nice, this needs a sticky.
why do you hate science?
>>16525999there can't have been much of a change in temperature if that is the case
>>16525999>Liquid-in-glass thermometers too imprecise to detect global temperature trend since 1850.>Margin of error for average global temp 1900-2010 (3.84°C) is 4.5x larger than claimed warming of 0.86°C.irrelevant for measuring trends
>>16526480That is only true if the trend is larger than the margin of error. I'm not saying the error disproves global warming, but I would hesitant to believe a trend that is less than the margin of error
>>16526575>That is only true if the trend is larger than the margin of error. i don't understand thismargin of error applies to each individual measurement, trends apply to lots of measurements. if a graph shows a trend, like say a 10% slope, the margin of error means you can't be sure of exactly how high the line is at each point, but it doesn't affect the slope. unless the error coincidentally worked exactly as needed to produce the slope, which is statistically improbable
>>16525999>mdpiAnd you expect me to take this or you seriously?
>>16526630The moe for an average is given by the average of the individual measurement's moe. If all measurements have similar moe, the moe for the average is in the same ballpark.You can think of the case of two measurements as a surface given by the integration of the two intervals between the max/min value given by the moe
>>16526713wait. why did you take scientific papers seriously? most of them are fraudulent
>>16526575>I'm not saying the error disproves global warmingIt disproves it
>>16526126Why can't science build a thermometer accurate enough to measure global warming?
>>16532010because global warming doesn't exist
>>16526118https://retractionwatch.com/2023/05/08/article-that-assessed-mdpi-journals-as-predatory-retracted-and-replaced/https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/08/10/guest-post-mdpis-remarkable-growth/https://www.resurchify.com/impact/details/130124#Impact%20IF%20Trend
>>16533521This, science can't build a camera that can photograph unicorns and they can't build a thermometer that can measure global warming
>>16534438lol
>>16534438
>>16534438>anding something to something that is always true to return just the truth value of the original thing >oring something to something always false>anding something to something always false so it is always false>oring something to something always true so it is always trueI can't remember what the name for these class of logical tricks is called
>>16532010you can't accurately measure genocide, eitherhttps://www.bitchute.com/video/8AHkAJrpAxd4
>>16539767OK, but "oy vey muh six million +/- six million" doesn't have the same ring to it
