Climate deniers don't deny climate change any more

And more bluff and guff from a son-scientist who knows nothing about science or climatology or atmospheric physics and has no education in science beyond primary school.

 

Totally irrelevant to the recent global warming and increases in atmospheric CO2 from human activity within the last 70 years.

 

Right. That's the advantage of the satellite temperature record: it gets an equal amount of data from every part of the world. The surface temperature record is wildly biased towards locations that have been inhabited for substantial periods, and have thus, in the modern era, become urbanized. Even sites that are still rural are affected by land use changes and the recent increases in human heat-releasing activities like use of farm machinery, heated buildings, and outdoor lighting.

 

Denial ain't just a river in Africa.

 

And just more irrelevant guff and bluff from a non scientist.

 

I've proved that claim false over and over again by the quality of the scientific evidence and logic in my posts. You, by contrast, have never offered any sort of evidence that you have any science background whatever.

 

Is that why do you deny all science about the recent changes in climate change caused by global warming and the increases in atmospheric CO2 within the last 70 years, and is that because you know nothing at all about science apart from a primary school class over 50 years ago?

 

IOW that's just the personal opinion of a non-scientist with zero scientific background..

 

There are many methods -- isotope ratios, biomarkers, deposition rates, etc. -- which are validated by the fact that they typically provide fairly consistent results that can be checked against each other. That's how science works -- a fact of which you are unaware because you do not know any science.

You don't have to keep proving that you know no science. We were convinced a long time ago.

 

No, it's a fact known to anyone who has read this forum recently.

 

I see you still have nothing to offer but absurd and disingenuous fabrications. Sad.

You don't know any science, which is why you don't know that there is a lot of disagreement in scientific circles about what has caused global warming in the last 70 years. Jack has posted hundreds of links to papers on the subject.

No, as you would know if you knew any science (you don't).

 

As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!"

 

Just more irrelevant bluff and guff from a non-scientist with no knowledge of science.

 

And do you use flying pigs to shoot your straw arrows?

 

And just more irrelevant guff and bluff from a non scientist.

 

So look in the mirror.

 

Even Blind Freddy can see that the daily cycle of temperatures results from Earth's rotation every 24 hours. But what causes "the natural cycles of temperatures of ice ages from Wikipedia"?

 

And none of that changes the fact that global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 from human activity have increased over my childrens' lifetimes resulting in climate changes.

 

FYI, a few degrees of temperature increase causes glaciers and ice caps to melt.

 

You'll have to point out that cooling period on the chart, considering that the average Temp line shows a consistent upward trend.

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/?intent=121

 

So what caused the temperature increase?

 

Alas "Denial ain't just a river in Africa".

 

So why can't you see it?

Oh, wait a minute, that's right: to know that, you would have to know that the earth is round, and rotates, and to know those things, you would have to know some science, which you do not.

How could anything that didn't happen in your lifetime be relevant? Why would you refer to Wikipedia when you have never read any science from any source?

 

And just another miracle of uninformativeness from you....

 

Just more bluff and guff from a non scientist with no knowledge of science and scientific methodology.