4 ms·

> The problem in climatology is that when the models don't fit the data they just change the data and claim victory That is... not remotely true, nor supported

> The problem in climatology is that when the models don't fit the data they just change the data and claim victory That is... not remotely true, nor supported by either of the links you shared. (Nor by any cursory look at the state of the world today, with well-anticipated Himalayan glacial floods as front-page news.) You therefore appear to be leaping over the line from healthy skepticism to irrational conspiratorial thinking, so I'm going to stop engaging, sorry.

mike_hearn 17d ago
Feel free to not engage, but for anyone reading the Nepal flash flood was caused by bedrock giving way, which isn't climate related. https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2026/08/28/new-satellite-images-reveal-surprise-cause-of-nepal-floods-not-just-a-glacier.html https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2026/08/28/new-satellite-i... The two links I give show the problem in action. In 2013 the IPCC was concerned because temperatures had gone sideways for a decade. Der Spiegel's first sentence is "Data shows global temperatures aren't rising the way climate scientists have predicted" and the next says they were trying to "hush it up". In 2015 climatologists announced a new temperature record that replaced the entire 21st century with different data, as reported by Nature. That's an unambiguous sequence of events. You can't make statements about replicability in an environment where they routinely decide their already published data is wrong post-hoc, without retracting the papers built on that data.
- rightnutwingjob 17d ago
  Shoosh. And if you won’t shoosh yourself, a handful of The True Adherents Of The Science will down vote you. Because Down Votes Are Truth. And that, ladies n gennelman, is How Science Works. That’s how we end up with Jason Arday: Up Votes.
rightnutwingjob 17d ago
Disengaging isn’t part of the scientific method. Disengaging is sticking your fingers in your ears and blurting out “la la la la I can’t hear you!” And calling that a win. The problem isn’t science, the problem is that there are adults with the maturity of a four year old acting as sciences hype man.

mike_hearn 17d ago

Feel free to not engage, but for anyone reading the Nepal flash flood was caused by bedrock giving way, which isn't climate related. https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2026/08/28/new-satellite-images-reveal-surprise-cause-of-nepal-floods-not-just-a-glacier.html https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2026/08/28/new-satellite-i... The two links I give show the problem in action. In 2013 the IPCC was concerned because temperatures had gone sideways for a decade. Der Spiegel's first sentence is "Data shows global temperatures aren't rising the way climate scientists have predicted" and the next says they were trying to "hush it up". In 2015 climatologists announced a new temperature record that replaced the entire 21st century with different data, as reported by Nature. That's an unambiguous sequence of events. You can't make statements about replicability in an environment where they routinely decide their already published data is wrong post-hoc, without retracting the papers built on that data.

rightnutwingjob 17d ago
Shoosh. And if you won’t shoosh yourself, a handful of The True Adherents Of The Science will down vote you. Because Down Votes Are Truth. And that, ladies n gennelman, is How Science Works. That’s how we end up with Jason Arday: Up Votes.

rightnutwingjob 17d ago

Disengaging isn’t part of the scientific method. Disengaging is sticking your fingers in your ears and blurting out “la la la la I can’t hear you!” And calling that a win. The problem isn’t science, the problem is that there are adults with the maturity of a four year old acting as sciences hype man.