Might have had a small influence, but its probably more likely due to sun activity as it correlates closely to temperature on a larger time scale.
1 Like
Oh okay, weâre back to opinions
Youâll be fine
Probably. Because despite all this frivolity, we are working to change our energy generation.
Highlighting the complete inaccuracy of the entire science. One data set against anotherâŚ
1 Like
Thatâs likely going to make people suffer more. Youâll be fine unless you move to Africa
Like I have previously stated, I read it
â but its probably more likely due to â
Thatâs not what youâre doing. You were provided with information scientifically observed and peer agreed upon as most likely. The above sentence means that you have an opinion or a feeling against it.
I think equatorial areas might have a keen interest in slowing the warming weâre seeing.
1 Like
Really? Because you have almost never responded to an evidence backed rebuttal. You vanish in a puff of smoke.
1 Like
Extrapolating from Millaâs braindead assumption that industrial production peaked before 1970, those regions donât matter
3 Likes
this thread is just an ouroboros of two people posting, being proven wrong, running away then coming back two weeks later to do the same thing
7 Likes
Except theyâre more concerned with eating.
Yes blocked forever
Not saying it peaked, but that period basically ushered in mass consumerism through scaled manufacturing, yet we saw the temperature drop.
1 Like
How are we proven wrong? Wouldnât we need a time machine to prove it?
What matters is that CO2 ainât the reason. Thats the foundation stone of the whole shebang
1 Like
This entire forum owes its existence to a similar psychosis, the only difference being every so often our team wins so thereâs at least some incentive.
If I explain it to you, will you run away again and not reply for a month?
Youâve done it nowâŚ
1 Like