I would love to join or start a movement: "Conservatives for conservative solutions to AGW", but it is very hard to at the moment. Democrats are hyperbolic and using CC as a weapon, and I am moving past the AGW stage into good energy policies. Not Macron's.
-
-
Also fair enough. I am still in the research phase myself so I don’t have a preference (although I am quite the contrarian, as I am sure you noticed).
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
"The Pairwise Homogenization Algorithm was designed as an automated method of detecting and correcting localized temperature biases due to station moves, instrument changes, microsite changes, and meso-scale changes like urban heat islands."http://berkeleyearth.org/understanding-adjustments-temperature-data/ …
11 replies 4 retweets 12 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
The counter argument is that ice has increased elsewhere.
5 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
well, "it's complicated" once again. Antarctica is a problem child compared with the Arctic. And yes, adjustments are involved too. This talks about the supposed gain of ice in Antarctica. I will find a newer article. This one is 2015.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/05/a-controversial-nasa-study-says-antarctica-is-gaining-ice-heres-why-you-should-stay-skeptical/?postshare=2541446754571422&utm_term=.4c495ab12e8e …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
If I may Jeff I think that's too much door opening and not enough focus. I firmly believe only doing one point thoroughly and see what we learn in the process is the only way to make progress, hence my call to start /w checking if raw datas say what Heller say they do. /1
7 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think Scott's original claim that if the temperature data is faulty, then AGW goes out the window. Temperature data is not the only indicator in town. I am not trying to Red Herring anyone. We still have an AGW case using these other indicators.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
There are credible skeptical counters to the evidence from sea level, ice, coral, and temperature data. But I never see the counters to the skeptical arguments. Unfortunately, whoever goes last is most persuasive when the topic is complicated beyond the jury's comprehension.
7 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
The Denial101x series does a lot of debunking of skeptic arguments. It has interviews with some of the pioneers in the field. https://www.youtube.com/user/denial101x
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The first claim is the false 97% claim. How can I trust the rest?
-
-
The 97% argument I don't give much weight to. I am more interested in the science and visible manifestations of warming, like corals, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don't rely solely on Skeptical Science, just a starting place.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.