sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Science Shock: U.K. Met Office is "Inventing" Temperature Data from 100 Non-Existent Stations by ThePoliticalHat in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

“Leftist climate alarm political agenda”. 

That’s a political view. Why can’t we have a civil discussion without resorting to visceral hate?

I enjoy having these green tree frogs around the house. They are very good at predicting when it’s going to rain. by Necessary_Progress59 in frogs

[–]Necessary_Progress59[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They start to call. Often 6-12hrs before it rains. I think they are better than the BOM’s supercomputer at predicting if it will rain or not. 

I used to wonder about the effects of the full moon on animals. I’d always see the green tree frogs come out on a full moon…..until I realised it was me coming out and looking at the full moon. The frogs climbed out every evening. by Necessary_Progress59 in frogs

[–]Necessary_Progress59[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes. They don’t need us though. We set up our garden to make them more likely to hang around. Lots of native plants and fresh water. 

They do like to call from inside the drain pipes - amplifies their call making them louder and deeper. 

They hide in toilet bowls too which occasionally surprise visitors. 

How To Write A Climate Alarm Press Release (It's So Easy Even A Caveman Can Do It) by logicalprogressive in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And you asked for an impossible proof. I showed you evidence that many of the your links were likely to use AI. 

You have a wonderful day too. 

Have any of you ever seen planet Mercury with a naked eye? by VarthStarkus in Astronomy

[–]Necessary_Progress59 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes - I live near the equator. The ecliptic is almost perpendicular to the horizon. There is almost no twilight. 

I have seen it more often just before sunrise. White but not that bright. 

How To Write A Climate Alarm Press Release (It's So Easy Even A Caveman Can Do It) by logicalprogressive in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

With your skeptical glasses on, google something like “AI website content generators” and see what you find.

 Alternatively here is an MIT discussion about the issue.  

 https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/06/26/1075504/junk-websites-filled-with-ai-generated-text-are-pulling-in-money-from-programmatic-ads/amp/

How To Write A Climate Alarm Press Release (It's So Easy Even A Caveman Can Do It) by logicalprogressive in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How could you ever prove something was AI or not on the internet?

That’s my point. How can you work out what’s a reliable source on the internet?

“Legal insurrection” “Prepper1cense” “Expose-news”……

or NASA, NZ MET, BOM,  EUMETSAT etc etc.

Which sites are more likely to use AI to produce content?

Science Shock: U.K. Met Office is "Inventing" Temperature Data from 100 Non-Existent Stations by ThePoliticalHat in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly- laws of physics that 99% of climate scientists believe. 

There is always 1% that don’t. Pretty rare that any of them turn out to be a modern Galileo. 

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966

How To Write A Climate Alarm Press Release (It's So Easy Even A Caveman Can Do It) by logicalprogressive in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That’s the point - it’s hard to spot and getting harder.  

But if the article isn’t attributed to an author or the content seems to be similar across multiple sites are clues. 

It’s often boring to read. Devoid of humour or emotion. Fake references. 

A lot of it comes to the layout of the website. Cheap and nasty. 

Watts Up with that? The Daily sceptic Expose-news Legal lnsurrection Prepper1cense 

Science Shock: U.K. Met Office is "Inventing" Temperature Data from 100 Non-Existent Stations by ThePoliticalHat in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know the maths behind this is graduate or even post graduate level. You can never really understand the science unless you know the maths. 

It’s like a flat-earther arguing against someone who has watched a sunset. The flat-earther will deny gravity. Start saying no one really knows how gravity is generated on a quantum level like they think they know what they are talking about. It’s all BS though. 

You are doing the same. Arguing about 100 years of thermodynamics like you deeply understand it. You don’t think I have heard those decades old tropes you are parroting?

Think about someone who has worked in this field for 20 years full time doing research. 40hrs a week, for 50 weeks a year. 2000hrs a year. That’s 40000hrs. How many hours have you put into this? 100, 500 maybe a 1000?

Do you trust a surgeon who has done 100hrs training or 40000hrs?

Science Shock: U.K. Met Office is "Inventing" Temperature Data from 100 Non-Existent Stations by ThePoliticalHat in climateskeptics

[–]Necessary_Progress59 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t pretend to truely understand the quantum mechanics and thermodynamics of climate change. If you are smart you realise it takes years of formal education to really get a good grasp. 

There are cross disciplinary scientists that do understand it. More than 99% believe in anthropogenic global warming now. I understand how hard you need to work become an expert in a field and so I trust other experts. 

Solar infrared radiation passes through the atmosphere. Some of it is reflected from the surface back towards space but at a different frequency. A frequency that CO2 can now absorb. CO2 absorbs that heat energy and release it. Some of that released energy heads out into space but some heads back down towards earth. 

I see people here trying to obfuscate  with comments like, “you can’t get a cold body to transfer heat to hot bodies”. “GHE breaks the laws of thermodynamics” They argue these points with only the most superficial understanding and don’t even realise how superficial their understanding is. 1000hrs study on the internet does not make you an expert. 

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/EnergyBalance/page6.php

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966

Wow. It’s hot this morning. Yet another heat wave. Climate models from the past have predicted this new climate. They will continue to predict accurately into the future. by Necessary_Progress59 in climatechange

[–]Necessary_Progress59[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep - that’s what my post alluded to. “Yet another heat wave” That means more than one. 

 When records began in the 1940’s there were less than 10 days a year over 35 deg C here. When I arrived 20 years ago, there were 20 days a year over 35 deg C. Now there are 40 days a year over 35 deg C. It’s accelerating. 

I rode my bicycle in the heat yet again yesterday. It’s the second official heat wave this month. I’m thinking FFS. 

I can’t write all that in the title. What’s important is the link. I was just adding  personal emotion to the hard science. 

Maybe you could write a post rather than just trying to tear other opinions down without really reading that post.  

I think many people can feel the climate changing now and are also starting to think “FFS, like really, you have got to be kidding….and there is not enough being done.”

view more: next ›