Yet another “scientific” article making no scientific arguments, only rhetorical ones.
What does “scientific consensus” mean? What did it mean in the 1970’s? What does it mean now? What relevance, if any, does it have to “science” or, more generally, to the truth of the matter?
” There have now been 360 consecutive months when the global temperature was above the 20th century average.”
What’s “global temperature” mean? How was it calculated over those 360 months? How was the “20th century average” calculated/measured? What’s the basis for the comparison? What are the uncertainties? How were they determined? Are they greater or less than the difference? We ordinary mortals would like to know. Excuse us for asking.
360 months = 30 years. 1200 months = 100 years = 20th century.
Half of the 20th century temps were above average. Half were below average. That's what "average" means.
I think we can figure out the relative significance of this.
My question that usually stumps these idiots is “what’s normal?”
Of course, most of these morons don’t even understand Earth’s orbit, sun spot activity, etc.
I remember in the 5th grade the “scientific consensus” was that Pluto was a plant. How did that work out? lol