jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 139,327
- 29,182
- 2,180
dude/ dudette, that is not how science works, one produces a theory and then compares it with observed, you have it assbackward fool. what you are describing is pseudoscience 101.Now THERE is that juvenile gratification that you warmers seem to crave. The expectation being that the Earth's climate system is as instantly responsive as my zero-turn mower. That because the stratosphere isn't warming INSTANTLY or "now" that somehow is all you need to dismiss the history of that parameter.
There goes flac again, invoking his magic theory that has never explained anything. It's a bit of pseudoscience he brings up when the real world makes him uncomfortable.
you need to get over this childish expectation that we are only looking at parameters that are shaped and scaled exactly like the temperature record. It would be just weird if you happened to stumble onto one or more parameters with a hockey stick shape that explained it all.
Let me remind you how science works. You create a theory to explain the observations, make testable predictions with it, and see if those predictions come true. AGW science has passing that test for decades now, which is why it has credibility. You're not doing science. You're invoking magic to explain why all those correct predictions weren't really correct predictions. If you want credibility, do some science. Create a theory and make testable predictions.