- Joined
- Jun 12, 2014
- Messages
- 6,873
- Reaction score
- 3,809
- Location
- DC
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
:doh
That's what I said.
Weird; you just said 2016 shows "an immediate impactful example of the agw hypothesis at work." Which means, you use it to show that the hypothesis is accurate. Which is what I said. 'Coz it sure can't show what you said it does without the hypothesis being accurate.
But it shows no such thing. It's an anomalous. That's the only valid conclusion you can draw.
Recent years show above-average ice. You'd sure as hell be down someone's throat taking one of those years to argue the opposite of you, and you know it.
So . . . you confirmed you were doing exactly what I said you were doing, and you're declaring some kind of mic drop here?
Your entire issue with my posts stems from your misunderstanding of it, not the actual data therein.
I started off talking about a specific example of warming, and the reasons for it. I then zoomed out to the topic of global warming in general, citing additional data. I did that because I don't think that an entire debate can be held over the topic of one years ice data (that isn't even complete yet) and wanted to link that specific example to the wider picture. If it helps you, think about my OP in 2 distinct sections.
Not once in our conversation have we actually talked about the actual topic of the OP, so yeah, sorry I didn't spell things out for you, I figured I wouldn't have to. If you don't have anything constructive to add around the actual topic, then yeah, consider this a mic drop, I've really got nothing else to say to you.
EDIT: Oh actually, I did see that you say that recent years show above average ice. Except, as the graph shows, the trend is downwards.
Last edited: