I ask because it shows this rate of warming increase is typical even before CO2 was the big deal it is now.
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SteveSGoddard and
The current warming rate stands out in the global averages. All the global temp. series that include the surface show a strong warming trend since the 1970s.pic.twitter.com/p09DiwWUYU
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SteveSGoddard and
The instrumental temperatures (starting 19th c) are the blade, with older paleotemp reconstructions being the stick. The original HS had a straightish stick & large uncertainty—the former getting bumpier, the latter smaller in subsequent studies (e.g. the attached plots).pic.twitter.com/xrcchIKHhL
5 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @priscian @ScottAdamsSays and
Astonishing that anyone in 2019 would still be using "Mike's nature trick" to "hide the decline." That graph is one of the most dishonest pieces of fraud and junk science ever generated.pic.twitter.com/yu9hJFVwiW
This media may contain sensitive material. Learn more
4 replies 23 retweets 71 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Your defense of that junk science graph, attempt to justify fraud, and accompanied insult doesn't look very good for you Erwin. This is the graph from the 1990 IPCC Report - before "Mike's nature trick."pic.twitter.com/k9vikcCd3U
This media may contain sensitive material. Learn more
1 reply 10 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @Tony__Heller @SteveSGoddard and
“WHEN you are a man-made #globalwarming alarmist prosecuting your case as “unprecedented” you need to make sure that no recent#climate era was as warm or warmer than present even if that means having to rewrite the past to fit your theory” http://tinyurl.com/y7cbrfon via@JWSpry1 reply 3 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @StormSignalSA @SteveSGoddard and
Again it seems obvious to me that you are interpreting casual language as literal language and finding something in nothing. Of course they need to "get rid of" any data that doesn't fit theory. That doesn't imply unscientific methods.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @StormSignalSA and
That is not how science work, that is how a scam works. If data contradicting your claim comes to light, you either refute the data or change your claim, not “hide it” from other scientists!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Climate change is not like most science, in the sense that believers are quite literally trying to save the planet, as they see it. That requires "marketing" their findings, which is the transparently bullshit part the models. No bad intent is in evidence.
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.