Your stopped at 2021. In 2012, you could have proposed to stop measuring at 2012, and claimed temps aren't rising - in fact, many who advocate against climate change DID do that, remember? In 1992 you could have claimed Earth is cooling. The reason for those claims would be bad analysis. That is NOT "skepticism".
Actual facts: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature What Hays was suggesting is NOT the facts, it was a statement of prediction of future climate that was not supported by science. Skeptics don't do that. Denialists do that.
The link stops in 2021 because it was posted in 2021. Had you read the linked post you would understand the hypothesis. You didn't, so you don't. And you don't get to wave your arms and declare a skeptic argument to be merely "bad analysis." That's my view of AGW theory, and I doubt you'd accept it.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-28/global-warming-effect-on-extreme-weather-events/103471564 I liked this quote from above
Ah, but I did, extending to you a courtesy you do not reciprocate. The article neither includes nor cites data.
Doesn’t it? Funny I saw multiple charts from multiple sources plus - this is the ABC - our national broadcaster. They have a very strong reputation for accuracy and honesty in reporting, unlike the blogs you often quote
Lots of weather charts but no data to support a claim of more frequent or severe extreme weather events. And in the end, of course, there's a model to show how rising temperature should produce more extreme weather. Except it doesn't.
That is NOT an excuse. That chart you presented about warming (where you connect the high and low extremes) WAS bad analysis. Further, it was fabricated to support your hypothesis about the future. Science isn't where you try to make excuses. Earth is continuing to warm. Can we at least recognize THAT?
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." -- Feynman, destroying denialism
Sorry, but it's AGW theory that really only exists in models and is routinely contradicted by observations. Feynman is the ally of skeptics.
The models have been excellent. If anyone told you otherwise, they lied to your face, so you should ask them why they lied. Unless, of course, you demand to be lied to, as tends to be the case with religious fanatics. Of course, the success of the models is just icing on the cake. The directly measured data confirms AGW conclusively. That's why your side expends so much effort in trying to discredit the actual data, and in place of it substitute your pseudoscience yammering. Remember, you can't gaslight anyone who isn't part of your religion, so you should stop trying. We know the facts, so we know you and your religion are making everything up. Faking it. Fudging it all. Engaging in big time fraud. You get the picture. The world of science certainly gets the picture, which is why your side is accurately classified as being science deniers. If right-wing politics vanished, denialism would instantly vanish along with it, because denialism is entirely political. If left-wing politics vanished, AGW science wouldn't change at all, because it's actual science.
