You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why Climate change is a hoax
No I'm criticizing the interpretation of the data you are using (it's terrible), and your opinions (they are predicated on poor interpretation). Not the data itself. It's common among those who deny what is happening, to have no clue what the data they are using means. You are no exception to this trend. Do more research, or even better, have some trust in those who have dedicated their lives to it. "Experts" do generally know something about their fields. I know quite a bit about mine (enzyme kinetics). Climate scientists know a lot more than either of us about these trends.
I am not however, criticizing You personally either. Just want to clarify that, only this one opinion you have formed.
Your argument is that I am uneducated. Your criticism is very personal and you don't present a single argument on the topic other than "the experts will know best". This argument can end any discussion about anything you are not an "expert" on, so it is invalid to me.
No I am not arguing that you are uneducated. I am arguing that you are inexperienced.
same thing. I actually was a tutor for logic and argumentation in college and studied a few years in STEM, dropout tho. Not because radical believes, but because too lazy ^^*.
That's why I was acting insulted. I know very well how scientific debate and political debate work. I think you will be surprised by my next article on this topic ;)
could you be more specific please?
No, never. I am a critical thinker on all topics.
You are using too big a brush to see human contributions. I have already stated that this data is not sufficient to examine current trends.
Look at MORE data, and start putting the pieces together as the climate scientists do. Wikipedia is not a good source for where to obtain it, go Into the primary literature (there's a lot of it).
You may consider your self a critical thinker but you clearly do not understand how to analyze data. Likely due to inexperience rather than lack of capability. Read more, you are making up your mind based on a super small subset of information, presented in a way that is insufficient to draw said conclusions.
I'm not going to point you to specific articles, I don't have them in easy access. I've seen enough at conferences enough times and had things explained enough times by people who understand the complete picture to be fairly confident in the consensus. You clearly aren't, so go digging. What you present here is insufficient to refute well... Anything.
be specific
Believe me or not, but I have seen whole documentations about climate change before. Try to educate yourself on why climate and weather are hard to predict. I can also explain you the ropes of it with my good educational background in science and math, but I recommend professional sources.
Go on pubmed and do a search of the primary literature. I AM being specific.
Well I actually have more than enough fodder from https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/ it's juicy as hell if you get to the actual arguments. I will post part 1 of me disputing all these arguments soon. Thanks for the link :)
Good luck.
thanks, hold those nobel prices ;)
https://steemit.com/politics/@thatgermandude/my-data-is-better-than-yours-1-climate-change-data-1-the-beginning
:3