I'll wait for your graph, showing that. What I see is that for the past 10,000 years the temps have gone up and down like a ping pong ball.

I also see that anyone predicting the climate from a few decades of temps... is pretty much an idiot.







This post was edited by Ghot on Sep 26 2019 03:47pm

Yes, it's true, you are unable to understand that a magnitude of Y happening in a 200 years lapse has not the same impact than one in 50 millions years.

It's like you cant understand that if you boil a glass of water in 10 minutes lapse, it evaporate quietly, but if you do it in 0.01 second: it explode.

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Sep 26 2019 03:49pm

Don't quit your day job. :/

Oh look it's a cycle...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-temperatures/evidence-for-man-made-global-warming-hits-gold-standard-scientists-idUSKCN1QE1ZU

For you it's stupidity.

https://skepticalscience.com/climate-models-intermediate.htm

Idk



We seem



To be doing



A pretty good job.

Graphs that JUST show the last 100-200 years are .... POINTLESS. We are considering a geologic process, and by doing so must consider things on a geologic scale.

Why? If we want to predict the next 100 years it doesnt seem like it would be relevant to include data from a million years ago

basically no matter what, the rise in temperature can definitely not be us!


And Ghot knows this how...?

What does this graph show?












... it shows ME that the climate seems to be cyclic on approx. 100,000 year intervals. So looking at 100 years of data to predict the climate is not only bad science, but stooopid.







/e




Cause the rises and drops in global temperature were occurring long before we existed.

This post was edited by Ghot on Sep 26 2019 04:48pm