Half those temps are lower than normal. Doesn't even tell the story they want it to.

lol.

YouBet said:

---

Half those temps are lower than normal. Doesn't even tell the story they want it to.

lol.

---

All it takes is selecting a color palette for your map that only includes orange through dark red and voila! Global warming!

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

First reply is perfect:

This is climate change. pic.twitter.com/ofWTySpMOH

— Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) June 26, 2025

---

Thanks for turning me on to the account IFindR-words, that dude has some funny stuff.

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

First reply is perfect:

This is climate change. pic.twitter.com/ofWTySpMOH

— Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) June 26, 2025

---

East coast is in a heat wave!!! The world is ending. Pay no attention to the lower temperatures across the central and western US.

The switch from global warming to climate change was brilliant. They win the argument no matter what happens...lol

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

First reply is perfect:

This is climate change. pic.twitter.com/ofWTySpMOH

— Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) June 26, 2025

---

This is a weather map, not a climate map.

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

Quote:

---

You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels.

---

That is correct. I don't believe in "scientific consensus" being a reasonable basis for pursuing widespread societal changes in our standard of living any more than I believe that "popular opinion" should dictate medical care decisions or that an Academy Award Oscar means it's going to be a good movie.

"scientific consensus" =/= "science"

Consensus means opinion and nothing more. And we all know what opinions are worth because everybody's got one.

The 'scientific consensus' was that we should all wear a mask and not congregate together outside unless rioting about George Floyd's death, as I recall.

Imagine wanting to eliminate the best things man has done to create a more comfortable and less miserable existence than 99% of our ancestors ever thought of in the name of climate pseudo science.

KillerAg21 said:

---

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

---

A 97%er!!!!! We haven't seen one of you in a while.

Always enjoy the suspension of how science actually works when it comes to "climate science".

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

I remember 2019 (before the war) like it was yesterday.

Poor Greta had to move off the climate change grift and onto the Gaza grift.

Your timeline is good but you left out Guam tipping over

Quote:

---

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

With respect, it's the lack of evidence that fails to persuade. Again, "consensus" =/= "evidence"

KillerAg21 said:

---

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

---

"Tierney, who heads the lab in which this research was conducted, is also known for her contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports and climate briefings for the U.S. Congress."

Stopped reading at IPCC.

KillerAg21 said:

---

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

---

The "scientific consensus" is a farce designed to shut down debate. Science doesn't work by consensus. When the majority of "climate scientists" hide their data sets and methods to prevent having their work duplicated and/or debunked, they are not a science. Take a look at some of the data and research gathered by guys like Anthony Watts or Steve McIntyre into weather station siting issues and backwards data adjustment of the historic datasets and you will see that alot of the stuff that "climate scientists" tout is useless junk science.

I love how killer ag is wrong on every single take on this forum

KillerAg21 said:

---

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

---

You need to think like a scientist. "Science is the culture of doubt" (Richard Feynman). The "consensus" changes dramatically when new evidence is presented. You need to say "current consensus". The fact is that "climate change" is a complex issue with many variables (human contributions is just one of these variables) and that there will never be concreate evidence that humans "cause" climate change. Always use terms that acknowledge doubt, such as "may artificially increase global temperatures" etc.

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

"Evidence" created by people paid to find specific evidence is certainly not convincing. All you have to do is follow the money to figure out what's going on. But no amount of evidence will convince you.

Keep in mind there are layers to this. A lot of the science is valid, in context, for what it is. They are puzzle pieces. The IPCCC gathers that data together in a massive analytical report periodically. It has some institutional biases of course but generally speaking, the full report is still a. Collection of pieces of data.

Then more layers of "analysis and interpretation" are applied as the massive report is condensed and summarized for political and public consumption. This is where the politics greatly begins to intrude by making inferences, selecting only potions of the data to look at and draw conclusions from, and injecting political language and inferring moral values and actions. The summary report that they generate is definitely biased and politicized, after the activists and politicians have had their change to "interpret" higher levels of analysis and bend it to their own purposes.

The problem is this gradual distortion from raw science to politicized analysis gives the political manipulation the facade of unassailable objectivity.

coolerguy12 said:

---

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

"Evidence" created by people paid to find specific evidence is certainly not convincing. All you have to do is follow the money to figure out what's going on. But no amount of evidence will convince you.

---

I sat in Rm 101 in Halbouty back in 1988-1989 and listed to the new dean of the college of geosciences tell the entire college that anybody who wanted to get their research funded going foward needed to find a way to tie it in with climate change, because that is where all the funding was coming from. And the funding is only looking for research that climate change is a problem.

Maroon Dawn said:

---

The scam never dies. If we leave this solar maximum we're in and enter a solar minimum period they'll claim global cooling is man made and can only be stopped by giving government more power and taxes

---

They did a scam like that in the 70's - we were headed for the next ice age according to the same alarmist hacks that then transitioned straight into manmade global warming.

KillerAg21 said:

---

The point has never been that the earth doesn't change temperature. It is the fact that it is rising in a way that is unsustainable to the human population and it will cause mass casualties to a variety of populations. Life on Earth will go on for billions of years after humanity is gone. They are just trying to keep us here as long as possible.

https://www.ukri.org/who-we-are/how-we-are-doing/research-outcomes-and-impact/nerc/the-story-behind-the-discovery-of-the-ozone-hole/

---

Lol

Do you have any idea how much the climate has changed in the last milli9n years alone? Some how our predecessors found a way to keep on truckin.

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

It's called looking at the actual, measurable evidence. Not the scare tactics.

The measurable evidence that have resulted from increased CO2 are the world is 20% greener and crop yields have increased 15%.

So...good things. That we can actually measure.

Following this thread.

KillerAg21 said:

---

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

---

Your idol Barack Hussein Obama doesn't believe it either. If he did, he would not be buying mega mansions directly on coastal waters and flying private all across the globe.

Imagine what a POS you have to be to believe in the climate doomsday BS, while still maintaining the individual carboon footprint of 500 avg US families. Can you admit that Obama is a POS hypocrite?

KillerAg21 said:

---

I just want to get this straight. You don't believe in the scientific consensus that humankind has been artificially increasing the global temperature due to the burning of fossil fuels. Yet you are trying to show to me a graph of past temperatures of the earth. That would have been done assuming by scientist and academics One you just pulled out of thin air with no citation.

https://phys.org/news/2021-11-global-temperatures-years-today-unprecedented.html

---

Another consensus among scientist, and there have been many others proven wrong.

What caused climate change millennia ago?

Why, Neanderthals in their SUV's, of course.

What was the temperature of Texas 300 years ago and who recorded them?

DallasAg 94 said:

---

What was the temperature of Texas 300 years ago and who recorded them?

---

Measured by a combination of tree rings, polar ice cap core samples, stories of locals who are between 1/8th and 1/16 Cherokee recounting what their great-great aunt told their cousins at a family reunion that they didn't attend, and researchers trying to secure funding.

Do you even science, bro?

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

Show us untainted and unmanipulated evidence that doesn't require us to send tax dollars to the "disproportionately impacted" via the federal government and/or the UN due based on an arbitrary Celsius ceiling that will require technology that doesn't exist to not go over that ceiling...and maybe we will listen.

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

Good thing we have all these trees on earth to turn the CO2 back into Oxygen. It would suck if we didnt.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

KillerAg21 said:

---

Popular opinion in medical care is far cry from the global climate and the long term effect of pumping of billions and billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's your issue like many on here. No amount of evidence will persuade your opinions and that is sad.

---

Good thing we have all these trees on earth to turn the CO2 back into Oxygen. It would suck if we didnt.

---

And we've only added more trees in the USA over the decades.