"climate scientists" don't and can't do real science.
Any occupation that claims to be science but is based of models and surveys is just agenda pushing using the previous credibility science had to scam the public.
There are a couple of things to add that would make the video more convincing. First, how are they generating estimates? Could it be that they're basically double-counting data from nearby weather stations to calculate an average? He shows where the disabled stations are, but not the active ones.
It would also be neat to see if the disabled stations were measuring a more "extreme" cooling trend relative to the remaining active stations.
instead of removing the dead stations from the calculations they just make shit up? how can these be called scientists?
"climate scientists" don't and can't do real science.
Any occupation that claims to be science but is based of models and surveys is just agenda pushing using the previous credibility science had to scam the public.
And should you do your job and create a new model that doesn't lineup with THE MESSAGE, you're told it must be wrong.
Couldn't watch/listen to the clip but they've been pushing for global temperature monitoring by satellites for years now.
The problem with this inherently is they can only check surface temperature and not air temperature (which is what we use currently)
That is how England had 40c last summer because they checked the runway at one of the major airports; the actual air temperature can be much cooler.
Even satellite data shows that climate science is pseudoscience: https://archive.md/dZMWg
There are a couple of things to add that would make the video more convincing. First, how are they generating estimates? Could it be that they're basically double-counting data from nearby weather stations to calculate an average? He shows where the disabled stations are, but not the active ones.
It would also be neat to see if the disabled stations were measuring a more "extreme" cooling trend relative to the remaining active stations.