Weather station in Antarctica records high of 65, the continent's hottest temperature ever

NASA was evaluating the models released by other individuals and groups (including one of their own).

And no, the models that were wrong does not make them fraudulent, it makes them inaccurate. That type of analysis is a good thing because it helps to improve future models.

 

You just keep running in circles. How many times do people have to provide links to the same thing?

It's your nonsense that you are trying to prove, yet you fail to understand basic Geology and ask the same question repeatedly.

 

I have been asking you for a link - REPEATEDLY.

Where can I find your link?!

 

1) 10K years too short. It's not a true and accurate account of climate change. Your data and time frame is too narrow making it almost obsolete.

2) It's a concept when it comes to climate change. We all know snow reflects light. So do many things in nature. The earth is a big, big place and not everything is absolute or covered in snow.

 

In many of the other discussions we have had.

I am not going to go in circles with you because you are just pushing a political agenda, which is pretty much fake news.

 

So you push a political agenda based on narrow and inaccurate data with models that are flawed and inaccurate as well? How "Nancy Pelosi" of you. lol

 

Here we are decades into this farce with no tangible proof, dozens of wrong predictions, and a slew of new predictions that can be wiped away with any number of events humans don't control. How much are supposed to spend and how long are supposed to wait? You can't correct the inaccuracies of the past...

 

If you eliminated all of the areas that are covered in snow, then do you think that would affect climate change?

So now you think that 10,000 years is TOO SHORT for evaluating climate change? Seriously? Why?

 

Dude, you have yet to provide a single link or to answer the question directly.

How do scientists know the temperature from 400 million years ago? What was the timeframe during which the CO2 concentration went from 4500 ppm to 3000 ppm?

 

It absolutely is. And all I have to do is quote your OP.

Global Warming is very real and humans are the most significant cause.

You went from an absolute statement so "almost certainly"

And you are still running from providing your evidence that humans are the primary source of climate change even after I gave you the parameters you claimed you needed.

Painfully predictable.

 

The primary reason you reject the science of climate change is because you do not like the policy ramifications from its conclusions.

 

Yet again, you fail to even identify a single hypothetical example of a fact or data point that would count as proof to you.

 

What is the hottest year on record?
What is the hottest decade on record?
What is the hottest quarter century on record?

 

I reject your political agenda and your data and your fake news title to this thread. I like factual conclusions which is something you have failed to provide.

 

are you trying to imply all of this is caused by humans?

 

Its not my argument Legal. Its yours. All you have to do is prove your claims of what the primary cause of climate change is and that humans are producing that primary cause

The rest of this is just cheap stalling techniques because you don't have the proof to back your claim up.

I see you once again ducked your "evolution" on your opinion as it has changed.

 

Yes, humans are almost certainly the most likely contributing factor to the reason why all of those happened in the last 25 years.

 

HOW CAN I POSSIBLY PROVE MY CLAIMS TO YOU IF YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF IDENTIFYING THE TYPE OR AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE THAT WOULD QUALIFY AS PROOF?!

 

Kinda like you have a failed to provide a single link?

 

"almost certainly" now instead of it being absolute.

Tell us Legal since you keep ducking my questions, what are humans producing that causes them to be "almost certainly" changing the climate?

No more BS, no more stalling, tell us.

 

But you don't know that because you are guessing. Especially since higher levels of CO2 have been recorded before humans walked the earth.

You can never get away from that fact, which sinks your agenda.

 

BECAUSE I WILL ACCEPT ANY PROOF THAT IS SUPPORTED WITH ACTUAL SCIENCE PROVING ITS CORRECT

Got it now Legal? Going to stall again? You have carte blanche

All you have to do is provide the proof. And we both know you can't

 

That's what you got? On record? Humans have been around thousands of years, we have less than 70 years of accurate recordings. Seeing as the only parameters we have is what we can record, its obviously within the recordable period. How convenient you now ignore billions of years of climate history. You folks get more and more pathetic ...

 

2015. Then again in 2019.

I don't have to be a genius to understand that Earth is going through a natural change. To be clear, I'm not arguing that the Earth isn't warming, my argument is that humans aren't responsible. We're not God and we can't control the change of the climate. Our actions have a very minimal effect.

 

Why do you think pollution in the atmosphere warms the planet?