Charming

WTF?

mhaze states: "The science shows that temperatures for a quarter of that time (ie 3000 out of 12000 years) were higher than the present."

This is presented as some "got ya" type statement as if it is somehow a rebuke of much of the Science that has been presented of threads relating to climate change.

The Scientific data and explanation of why this has happened can be found in many studies taken at many places around the world.

If you visit the repository Sciencegate you will find a wealth of the latest research on this topic along with relevant explanations.

When you analyse this Scientific research you will get a better understanding of the evidence that indicates the recent warming is, in fact, unprecedented.

One particular study gives an explanation of a specific 200-300 year cold event - close to a 150 year time block but then don't forget that the Holocene epoch is ongoing.

Hi WTF,
"When you analyse this Scientific research you will get a better understanding of the evidence that indicates the recent warming is, in fact, unprecedented."

He doesn't care about that.
He KNOWS better than NASA, the UN's IPCC, and the top 4 weather and temperature databases on the planet.

See, science died because "they" took over the world.

Also, Moonfall is a documentary - didn't you know?

(Winks. I wish more people here had your attitude to science!)

WTF?

Thanks Max Green.

What mhaze is essentially saying is: I know of some data that is the result of research conducted by climate Scientists. I can use this now to show that climate Scientists do not know what they are talking about.

It is a classic example of "feels before reals".

Will climate change cause these denier snowflakes to melt into the background? We'll have to wait and see.

"This is presented as some "got ya" type statement..."

Well actually it was presented as the type of science the follow-the-science crowd refuse to follow. How about you address my actual opinions rather than make them up and then ridicule the non-opinion.

"When you analyse this Scientific research you will get a better understanding of the evidence that indicates the recent warming is, in fact, unprecedented."

Oh good. Show it to us.

The fact is the science shows that paleo data is insufficiently precise to make any claims about particular 150 year periods. Under those circumstances it is impossible to say whether it is or isn't unprecedented. Show me differently.

Now if you want to look at my opinions rather than make them up for me, you'll see that I do accept that the current temperatures are increasing, that the dreaded CO2 is a partial cause and that the increase may continue for some time. What I don't accept is that the current temperatures are unprecedented and that, therefore, think the claims of climate emergency are rubbish.

Equally what I don't accept is the claim that the increases will be catastrophic or that 'the science' has proven that to be the case.

From that I don't accept that there is any validity in uprooting our society to fight the assumed emergency and most definitely there is no validity in denying modernisation to the still developing peoples so as to fight an unproven threat.

"How about you address my actual opinions rather than make them up and then ridicule the non-opinion."

Yep - there it is again.
We must address his OPINIONS rather than not address his OPINIONS.

And there I was thinking science was about data?

Hey, Mhaze - give us the years you think we have to deal with? Which 3000 years? Which block? One block? A few blocks? When to when? And who says they're a problem? What's your source?

But hey - if we're just discussing your OPINIONS then why don't we just sit back and listen to you count the various colours of your navel fluff as you navel gaze the day away?

(I'm getting bored. Try a more adult post soon or I'm going back to Reddit and a thousand other places where at least there's an interesting challenge now and then!)