For any of you who doubt how the left has always been wrong about their gloom and doom predictions related our earths weather and current, past and future climate please punch these 2 links. It's amazing how they have never been right yes NEVER about their predictions, NEVER! Yet people like Rex continue to believe these lies by the left. https://realclimatescience.com/fifty-years-of-failed-apocalyptic-forecasts/ https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/
It takes a moron to think that because someone predicted the Earth is cooling that that's evidence of the Earth not warming. Do you even pause to think about how you might contradict yourself?
i believe his point was that predictions of doom have a long history of being wrong. climate is incredibly complex and unpredictable. most religions have predictions for endtimes. often the end is caused by human actitivity, thats part of the lore. also its worth noting that your favored politician biden both begs saudi murderers for oil, and according to you, increases domestic production to record levels. so that should, according to you, destroy the earth at record levels. as, according to you, fossil fuels literally choke and drown the earth.
Complex? Yes. Unpredictable? Not so much. Scientists have been very accurate in their predictions since the 1970's.
incorrect. there are basically infinite examples of terrible predictions about the climate. the scientific consensus has been shit. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/opinion/sunday/science-climate-change.html "As we now know, all of those predictions turned out to be completely wrong" the new york times
Some predictions were wrong, but I REPEAT: predictions have been very accurate since the 1970's: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2019GL085378 https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envi...315/climate-change-prediction-models-accurate
article is based on this study https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2019GL085378 that study doesnt show that. all they had to do was predict a slight warming, and many of them were wrong. "10 of the 17 model projections show results consistent with observations. Of the remaining seven model projections, four project more warming than observed—N77, ST81, and H88 Scenarios A and B—while three project less warming than observed—RS71, H81 Scenario 2a, and H88 Scenario C" 10 out of 17 is 58 %, an F. beat a coin flip by 8% and the wrong ones were wrong in random ways, some too high, some too low. thats shit. that data can be thrown in the garbage. i could make the statement. "the climate will warm slightly and sea level rise a tiny amount, but humans will die at far lower rates from climate disaster than ever before" and be a prediction wizard
The fact is that all 17 models accurately predicted global warming and higher CO2 concentrations, most of which were almost spot on, and all within reasonable variances. That's 100%.
Scientific journal retracts article that claimed there's no climate crisis, pretty much calling the authors of that article scammers: https://www.theguardian.com/environ...te-crisis?mc_cid=028d87982f&mc_eid=88099e29d1 Now, according to Kikicaca's logic, where cherry-picked predictions (no matter how outnumbered) mean that global warming is bogus, doesn't it follow that a fraudulent article that denies global warming proves that global warming is real? Doesn't it follow that the personal need to defraud their readers about global warming proves that global warming is real? The point here is that predictions about the climate from several decades ago, no matter how erroneous, are irrelevant to the matter of global warming NOW, especially in light of improved data and modelling science.
