this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
1365 points (95.2% liked)
Memes
44124 readers
1727 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Temperature going up over time? Over how long? 100 years compared to billions, the age of earth? Do you even understand basic statistics to calculate the confidence in such a measurement?
All the bullshit you're parroting from television, like green house effect, is at best circumstantial evidence but it's not proof, and it's evidence with negligible confidence due to the huge error margin mentioned earlier. Even worse, it's not even evidence because of the oldest rule in the book "correlation doesn't imply causation", yet somehow it's still science when basic logic is broken to support a political agenda propped by ignorant people who know nothing in math and teenagers who still don't know the difference between integrals and derivatives and cry that "math is hard".
I hate to break it to you, but people who can't calculate the standard error on measurements shouldn't open their mouths about science, and certainly shouldn't ask us to surrender all our power and money to corrupt politicians for a fictitious goal.
I'm bored of hearing all this politicized nonsense. Maybe go find a book of someone who disagrees with your opinion and learn something outside of what you learned on television.
I don't think I'll respond if you bore me again.
I have a degree in statistics, do you understand statistics?
Correlation doesn't imply causation. But we have casual and testable mechanisms to validate these theories and what we're seeing. We can measure the greenhouse effect directly by experiment.
I hear your argument, Earth's been hotter millions of years ago, sure, but that doesn't invalidate human climate change at all.
I have a PhD in physics. I spent half of my life in labs doing measurements and calculating systematic and statistical errors on them in an experiment that collects data over years to get a single number. A good chunk of my thesis is on how to properly estimate errors in measurements that are years long. I have even worked with complicated concepts like propagating errors through mathematical models to minimize them.
No you don't have measurements to validate anything. You have "this line goes up, this other line goes up, and we think we can explain it with green house nonsense, and hence the correlation coefficient is 1.00000", and hence we caused it. You think I haven't seen this nonsense? 99.99% of the people have no idea what the hell they're talking about.
Yes, earth went hotter and colder million times before. This invalidates climate change. We have no proof, not even statistical, that humans caused anything. We only have political agendas and research groups who get funding if they agree to come to that result. And we have dumb people who don't understand basic logic or can add two fractions parrot what the television says in fear.
This is what climate change deniers say when they realize they are in too deep and have no idea what they are talking about.
Or people who have better things to do.
OK, teenager.