▲ | tomrod 7 days ago | |||||||
You're not sufficiently parsing causality versus predictivity. The global warming hypothesis matches the projections. So it's a food enough model. The causal attribution does take time, but recall we can estimate the global greenhouse emissions with reasonable accuracy and can compare to benchmarks in history. Push all we want against the sun, it continues to shine regardless of our efforts. | ||||||||
▲ | genewitch 6 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
global warming hypothesis! Have you seen the temperature graph for earth's history? Judd et al., Science 385, 1316 (2024) It's actually remarkably cold on earth, colder than it's been in over 450mm years. but if you look at the graph, it's not a diagonal or straight line, it goes up and down over millions of years. so, with these two facts: Will it get warmer or colder? Knowing that, why do i have to listen to this claptrap? | ||||||||
|