Grok's paper on why global climate change is likely natural

[gatomontes99]

6 hours ago, Hodad said:

Yes, I did. Why?

 

Maybe you'll figure it out some day.

[Hodad]

18 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Maybe you'll figure it out some day.

Unlikely. You post a lot of things that frankly don't seem to have any purpose. Random shit from twitter. Random shit from Grok. And often without even trying to make a topic of conversation of it.🤷‍♂️

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, User said:

The whole point of science is to test and for it to stand up to scrutiny and challenge. 

What is science supposed to do when it remains standing after the scrutiny and challenge has been met time after time after time?

[gatomontes99]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What is science supposed to do when it remains standing after the scrutiny and challenge has been met time after time after time?

Well, as I proved with the first two posts, there is scientific information that supports both sides. So your assertion that AGW hasn't faltered isn't factual. In fact, the counter argument is based on past observations and continued patterns. AGW is based on assumptions and fuzzy math. Fuzzy math, that has led to countless doomsday predictions that never came to pass.

[gatomontes99]

10 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Unlikely. You post a lot of things that frankly don't seem to have any purpose. Random shit from twitter. Random shit from Grok. And often without even trying to make a topic of conversation of it.🤷‍♂️

Attack me all you want. I gave you both sides. You could have debated either side. You chose to attack me. I would think that most, with the intellectual acuity to do so, would have picked a side and argued that.

But, those that are more astute would have seen that I was able to get the tailored results by how I phrased my query. That would have brought about a deeper discussion as to where AI gets it's data and who trims the data to manageable blocks.

But, you are more interested in pretending to be a keyboard warrier and wannabe bully. Carry on.

[Hodad]

2 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Attack me all you want. I gave you both sides. You could have debated either side. You chose to attack me. I would think that most, with the intellectual acuity to do so, would have picked a side and argued that.

But, those that are more astute would have seen that I was able to get the tailored results by how I phrased my query. That would have brought about a deeper discussion as to where AI gets it's data and who trims the data to manageable blocks.

But, you are more interested in pretending to be a keyboard warrier and wannabe bully. Carry on.

Why would I--or anyone--want to side with either of Grok's 5th grade essays? To what end? 

And you did not post your prompts, just the output. So why do you think we would notice how you tailored your "query"? I did, however, talk about where AI gets its data and why that's problematic. 

Look, Grok is a half-baked also-ran in the AI space. It could get better someday, but demonstrations like these just highlight the danger of spammy AI. And I have no idea why you posted it or what you wanted to "discuss" because you made no effort to communicate that. 

[eyeball]

20 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

AGW is based on assumptions and fuzzy math. Fuzzy math, that has led to countless doomsday predictions that never came to pass.

Except for the warming that's increasing.

21 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Well, as I proved with the first two posts, there is scientific information that supports both sides.

Yeah like 95% to next to nothing...like it always does time after time after time.

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

No.  People who didn't like the implication financed opposition.

Climate scare is older than everyone. 

Jesus will be here before the Earth melts, so don't worry about it.  

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

What is science supposed to do when it remains standing after the scrutiny and challenge has been met time after time after time?

We'll let you know if that happens. 

In the meantime... why don't you show us this science of yours?

[User]

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

What is science supposed to do when it remains standing after the scrutiny and challenge has been met time after time after time?

Science doesn't have to do anything. Many scientific theories have been challenged and moved on from over time as we learn more and do more experiments. 

There is no amount of time that somehow makes a scientific theory no longer challengable. 

Even then, "climate change" certainly isn't something like the theory of relativity either. It is best guess on models and assumptions right now. 

[CdnFox]

57 minutes ago, User said:

Even then, "climate change" certainly isn't something like the theory of relativity either. It is best guess on models and assumptions right now. 

This is important to note.

One of the hallmarks of science and it's measure of success for any of it's works is the ability to make accurate predictions. General relativity for example is noted for having made a huge number of very specific predictions which turned out to be true even tho it took many decades to prove it. It's stunningly accurate. 

However climate change models are NOT accurate in their ability to predict even how things will be one or two years from now. And the models produce "possible" outcomes with absolutely massive variances.  

It's so inaccurate and unreliable at this point that it's really hard to even call it 'science' except in the most general sense. 

[User]

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

This is important to note.

One of the hallmarks of science and it's measure of success for any of it's works is the ability to make accurate predictions. General relativity for example is noted for having made a huge number of very specific predictions which turned out to be true even tho it took many decades to prove it. It's stunningly accurate. 

However climate change models are NOT accurate in their ability to predict even how things will be one or two years from now. And the models produce "possible" outcomes with absolutely massive variances.  

It's so inaccurate and unreliable at this point that it's really hard to even call it 'science' except in the most general sense. 

But its like Tinkerbell. If enough people believe its true and they clap their hands, then its real! 

Which is why folks almost always fall back on the "consensus" argument to support climate change. 



 

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, User said:

But its like Tinkerbell. If enough people believe its true and they clap their hands, then its real! 

Which is why folks almost always fall back on the "consensus" argument to support climate change. 

 

Sure. Snake oil peddlers have been successful throughout recorded history. Soothsayers and the like lived very good lives and made lots of money   

But as intelligent and rational people it's important to recognize that and set it aside, and take a look at what the actual known facts and research says. And it's very telling that despite having numerous people on this forum ask for the research not one person on the left has been able to produce a single research paper that actually shows that climate change is a crisis or that anything Canada could possibly do by lowering emissions would have any noticeable or significant impact at all.

I'm entirely prepared to believe that mankind is changing the climate, there's a whole lot of us and we do a lot of crap. So it's believable. But I have seen nothing that suggests that it's some species of out of control crisis or that we wouldn't be better off in the short term adopting and looking for long-term solutions as the technology presents itself

Hey there is a massive ton of evidence to suggest that anyone who thought that you could tax climate change away isn't serious about the issue

[WestCanMan]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, it's science.  They look at data, test hypothesis, correct their formulas... all of this...

That's what you guys said about covid science too, and now even the NYT admits that it was all bought and paid for. "Someone lied to one of our reporters and we ended up ignoring the truth for 3 years 😭". 

All you guys say is "So what? We don't talk about covid anymore!" but just remember that your "covid science" is now proven to be "100% false". 

Your "climate science", in a nutshell:

1. ignores the leading experts in the field while focusing heavily on wealthy climate hypocrites
2. is predicated almost entirely on misrepresenting the overall level of consensus in the field by citing the results of one single study where nearly half of the researchers offered no opinion at all on climate change 
3. includes all the biggest liars of the political world (Dems, LPOC...)
4. is funded by energy-starved China in order to drive their green energy businesses and sell their expensive batteries. 

The Dems and LPOC can commit scandal after scandal, force kids to take dangerous pseudovaxes, destroy the economy, start proxy wars and waste hundreds of billions of dollars on them, and all they need to do to win your vote is say "The sky is falling!". 

FYI it was only 16,000 years ago that there was ice 3km thick in North America. Grouse Mountain is only 1.2km high... Glaciers have been receding this whole time. 

 

Not only have the Chinese duped all of you wee fools into killing domestic energy in your own country, now they have you attacking our own green energy companies 😂

What evidence do you actually have that you're not all just President Xi's useful id10ts? And just remember that, as you give your answer, there are leading experts in the field of climatology who are entirely convinced that you are wrong, and they are willing to show their faces and give their names along with those assertions... They're not just "random, anonymous people who were included in a study". 

[Hodad]

23 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

That's what you guys said about covid science too, and now even the NYT admits that it was all bought and paid for. "Someone lied to one of our reporters and we ended up ignoring the truth for 3 years 😭". 

All you guys say is "So what? We don't talk about covid anymore!" but just remember that your "covid science" is now proven to be "100% false". 

Your "climate science", in a nutshell:

1. ignores the leading experts in the field while focusing heavily on wealthy climate hypocrites
2. is predicated almost entirely on misrepresenting the overall level of consensus in the field by citing the results of one single study where nearly half of the researchers offered no opinion at all on climate change 
3. includes all the biggest liars of the political world (Dems, LPOC...)
4. is funded by energy-starved China in order to drive their green energy businesses and sell their expensive batteries. 

The Dems and LPOC can commit scandal after scandal, force kids to take dangerous pseudovaxes, destroy the economy, start proxy wars and waste hundreds of billions of dollars on them, and all they need to do to win your vote is say "The sky is falling!". 

FYI it was only 16,000 years ago that there was ice 3km thick in North America. Grouse Mountain is only 1.2km high... Glaciers have been receding this whole time. 

 

Not only have the Chinese duped all of you wee fools into killing domestic energy in your own country, now they have you attacking our own green energy companies 😂

What evidence do you actually have that you're not all just President Xi's useful id10ts? And just remember that, as you give your answer, there are leading experts in the field of climatology who are entirely convinced that you are wrong, and they are willing to show their faces and give their names along with those assertions... They're not just "random, anonymous people who were included in a study". 

There’s an entire global network of elites—scientists, governments, media moguls, and even space agencies—working tirelessly to maintain the lie that the Earth is round. This isn’t just a mistake; it’s a deliberate effort to keep people under control and distracted from the truth. These powers are using propaganda to manipulate the masses and hide the real nature of our world.

The space agencies, especially NASA, are the biggest culprits. They’re behind the so-called "space missions"—Apollo, Mars rovers, you name it. It’s all fake. The moon landing? Totally staged. The photos from space? Photoshopped, every single one of them. They manufacture evidence to make it seem like we live on a spinning globe, but the reality is, the Earth is flat. It’s a flat plane, and all the "images" from space are part of the illusion.

Governments are in on it too. They have a massive interest in keeping this truth suppressed because, if people knew the Earth was flat, everything would change. How? Think about it: new geography, new science, and the real reason why Antarctica is off-limits. It’s all connected. They can’t let us question the fundamental structure of the world because that would lead to massive upheaval.

And then there’s the media—movies, TV shows, books. They reinforce the globe narrative with every opportunity they get. Take any blockbuster movie, and you’ll notice the subtle nods to the "round" Earth. They’ve been pushing this agenda for centuries, making it look like the idea of a flat Earth is something of the past, when in fact, it’s the real truth.

So, yeah, the round Earth narrative is one huge global conspiracy. They want you to trust their "facts" and look at the world through their lens. But don’t be fooled! The Earth is flat, and the powers that be are doing everything in their power to keep you from realizing it.

 

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, Hodad said:

There’s an entire global network of elites—scientists, governments, media moguls, and even space agencies—working tirelessly to maintain the lie that the Earth is round. This isn’t just a mistake; it’s a deliberate effort to keep people under control and distracted from the truth. These powers are using propaganda to manipulate the masses and hide the real nature of our world.

The space agencies, especially NASA, are the biggest culprits. They’re behind the so-called "space missions"—Apollo, Mars rovers, you name it. It’s all fake. The moon landing? Totally staged. The photos from space? Photoshopped, every single one of them. They manufacture evidence to make it seem like we live on a spinning globe, but the reality is, the Earth is flat. It’s a flat plane, and all the "images" from space are part of the illusion.

Governments are in on it too. They have a massive interest in keeping this truth suppressed because, if people knew the Earth was flat, everything would change. How? Think about it: new geography, new science, and the real reason why Antarctica is off-limits. It’s all connected. They can’t let us question the fundamental structure of the world because that would lead to massive upheaval.

And then there’s the media—movies, TV shows, books. They reinforce the globe narrative with every opportunity they get. Take any blockbuster movie, and you’ll notice the subtle nods to the "round" Earth. They’ve been pushing this agenda for centuries, making it look like the idea of a flat Earth is something of the past, when in fact, it’s the real truth.

So, yeah, the round Earth narrative is one huge global conspiracy. They want you to trust their "facts" and look at the world through their lens. But don’t be fooled! The Earth is flat, and the powers that be are doing everything in their power to keep you from realizing it.

 

If you go look up reductio ad absurdum I think you'll find your picture there

[Legato]

16 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, it's science.  They look at data, test hypothesis, correct their formulas... all of this...

You forgot the most important thing, lowering themselves to acquiesce to the whims of their benefactors.

 

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, Legato said:

You forgot the most important thing, lowering themselves to acquiesce to the whims of their benefactors.

 

The science may be questionable, but the source of the funding is absolute

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, User said:

There is no amount of time that somehow makes a scientific theory no longer challengable. 

That's right, scientific theories also become better over time.

The most important fundamental prediction of AGW theory is still very much in effect, the more we burn the warmer things get. It should only be a simple matter of time to determine whether the temperature becomes intolerable and now we're poised to unleash our precaution and test the theory.

I just hope I get to live long enough to see how it all works out.

I certainly admire scientists who make predictions and devise experiments that take more time to complete than the lifespan of the experimenters. Speaking of which, experiments proved frogs actually do have the sense to jump out of a warming pot. It just takes time.

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

The most important fundamental prediction of AGW theory is still very much in effect, the more we burn the warmer things get.

Bullshit. Aside from the FACT that CO2 has always been a lagging gas that has a cooling effect, we are in a stage of warming. We are barely out of the last Ice Age and we are still a full 2C below the mean temperature  (aka the temperature the planet spends the most time at). 

Further, the hotter the planet gets the more life thrives. So this idea that getting warmer is a disaster is pure fiction of the Chicken Little order. Hotter planet = more temperate zones = more life. Ice Age has always resulted in mass extinction events for certain types of animals.

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Bullshit. Aside from the FACT that CO2 has always been a lagging gas that has a cooling effect, we are in a stage of warming. We are barely out of the last Ice Age and we are still a full 2C below the mean temperature  (aka the temperature the planet spends the most time at). 

Further, the hotter the planet gets the more life thrives. So this idea that getting warmer is a disaster is pure fiction of the Chicken Little order. Hotter planet = more temperate zones = more life. Ice Age has always resulted in mass extinction events for certain types of animals.

Have you presented your conclusions to the IPCC? You can bet they'd love to hear from you.

BTW what's a lagging gas or did you mean laughing gas?

[gatomontes99]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Have you presented your conclusions to the IPCC? You can bet they'd love to hear from you.

BTW what's a lagging gas or did you mean laughing gas?

Lagging gas...as in the increased of CO2 that accompanies warming events lags behind the increase in temperature. In fact, it is a byproduct of increased temperatures. It is a known fact that has been illustrated in hundreds of studies of core samples. 

I don't have to talk to the International Partnership of Chinese Communists. They already know the data. They just ignore it because they are not an organization in pursuit of scientific discovery. They are a political organization that weaponizes science to create fear and panic that will facilitate the transfer of power from those that currently hold energy (oil) to governments. It's your basic Pinky and Brain, take over the world, scheme.

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

I don't have to talk to the International Partnership of Chinese Communists. They already know the data. They just ignore it because they are not an organization in pursuit of scientific discovery. They are a political organization that weaponizes science to create fear and panic that will facilitate the transfer of power from those that currently hold energy (oil) to governments. It's your basic Pinky and Brain, take over the world, scheme.

Did you see this on W5 or 60 Minutes or something?

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Legato said:

You forgot the most important thing, lowering themselves to acquiesce to the whims of their benefactors.

Your TROLL fantasies are NOT "the most important thing."

Too bad you have ZERO EVIDENCE for them.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Speaking of which, experiments proved frogs actually do have the sense to jump out of a warming pot. It just takes time.

Now it's a race to see if frogs are smarter than "conservatives." Who will jump out first?