@CDMarshall7 @25_cycle @Ceist8 @thinks_about_it @ChrisBBacon3 @JunkScience @sueytonius @TheDisproof @TWTThisIsNow @priscian @BradSchrag @Andrewemcameron "It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land since pre-industrial
@toadmeister https://t.co/1kmrJqGTII "Even in the most unfavourable cases, we may reject the natural variability hypothesis at confidence levels >99 %."
@erition1 @VaryIngweion Te dejo algunos: https://t.co/Z4fGO0aHnc; https://t.co/ecDxRxqXUv ; https://t.co/1kmrJqGTII ; https://t.co/DAW14LTYFC Y sobre lo de que "ya ha pasado antes" : https://t.co/ZKT85pQXQv
@ecosdelfuturo https://t.co/1aTquGg8OD ahi muchissima evidencia que respalda el cambio climatico, apelar a lo que dicen 1100 cientificos donde la mayoria son de profesiones ajenas a la metereologia es absurdo xd
RT @balkraix: @Raclo20 @pokedavid012 El cambio climatico pre-revolucion industrial si, el mas reciente no: https://t.co/DAW14LTYFC https:/…
@Raclo20 @pokedavid012 El cambio climatico pre-revolucion industrial si, el mas reciente no: https://t.co/DAW14LTYFC https://t.co/1kmrJqGTII "Even in the most unfavourable cases, we may reject the natural variability hypothesis at confidence levels >99
@paginale @DanCady @GretaThunberg Hahahaha. You don't even know the name of the theory you are denying, Ray. Here, some help. https://t.co/Qi2sLeWAYN
@RandolphDoGood1 @James_BG I remember we had this discussion already. Of course the null hypothesis has been falsified. Eg https://t.co/hqPQdmyrza Or a second one: https://t.co/oeGwYGXVwO
@unabgehangte @9potatocorden @chris_french @BatcaveSlimer @brandondaly2018 @ClimateOfGavin @Tony__Heller In support of the first point this is a valuable statistical analysis: https://t.co/hqPQdmQ2XK 3/
@chris_french @9potatocorden @unabgehangte @brandondaly2018 @ClimateOfGavin @Tony__Heller For statistical hypothesis tests, this is a great paper worth a read, NOT based on GCM models: https://t.co/hqPQdmQ2XK Otherwise, the AR5 chapter on attribution (or
@scienceisbeauty @elmanyana @Luis_I_Gomez "el forzamiento radiativo del CO2 no establece por sí solo la atribución antrópica del calentamiento, y esta sigue sin estar determinada." Fyi. https://t.co/Qi2sLeWAYN
@Revlucduck @JSegor @ScottAdamsSays @FakeLeftSucks @SteveSGoddard @NikolovScience Re: "I appreciate" And you've gone back to your usual trolling. Let me know when you finally learn how to honestly address scientific evidence on man-made climate change, d
@jackklok @klimaatVeranda Uit onderzoek blijkt dat "natuurlijke variatie, zon en luchtdruk (???)" niet in staat zijn om klimaatveranderingen uit het verleden te verklaren. Zie bijvoorbeeld: https://t.co/l1XHi1JniW en: https://t.co/TKk8Bp4Ncq https://t.co/
Behold the second handers....Experts of Group-think.🤣🤣😆😆😂😂 https://t.co/0U4XWQGeqW
@datachck Re: "You are avoiding the question Identify specific fraction of 1.4F warming over 165 yrs" Go do some reading, denialist: "Scaling fluctuation analysis and statistical hypothesis testing of anthropogenic warming" https://t.co/Za4thAtXtT
Thanks! {user} get a copy of my FREE Books, for a limited time only! @ https://t.co/bEKHtOqfU4 https://t.co/WMIRsFQHkW
@Martyupnorth @BillKerr4 @DataMatters22 @KHayhoe @kwralex Re: "The fact that there is so much evidence that contradicts the theory" Yet you cite none, because you have no clue what you're talking about. "Scaling fluctuation analysis and statistical hypot
@bigcarbonprint @judgejurydraven @StewartNial @EricHolthaus @MobilizeClimate Re: "Anyway, I must stop winding you up" Did u say something? I can't make it out thru the fog of u evading evidence debunking u. https://t.co/Za4thAtXtT
@beefyfarmer @Conservatives @UKLabour @MollyMEP your opinion, whereas this study concludes it's >99% man made! https://t.co/DBbqoHmh3s
@Alienna3 Här en annan slags artikel i ämnet, mindre lättillgänglig men mer tydligt empirisk. https://t.co/iMRFtwEv4K
@sammydarlo @itvnews 99 percent of climate scientists accept AGW. http://t.co/ZxQnnWADtv
Un nuevo estudio que analiza estadísticamente los datos de temperatura durante el período pre-industrial y la era... http://t.co/n2coU8F8Ye
Anthropogenic global warming: http://t.co/ru2PaHSNWt #springerlink QED (cf http://t.co/AtJvWlEm8D )
Chances that current #globalwarming results from natural variability is only 1% http://t.co/6P2WeMHzBo #climatechange http://t.co/aLu3y4HyUa
Chances that current #globalwarming results from natural variability is only 1% http://t.co/6P2WeMHzBo #climatechange http://t.co/aLu3y4HyUa
Chances that current #globalwarming results from natural variability is only 1% http://t.co/6P2WeMHzBo #climatechange http://t.co/aLu3y4HyUa
New research that rejects the hypothesis that global warming is due to natural variability: http://t.co/MgLxhdhwme
Scaling fluctuation analysis and statistical hypothesis testing of anthropogenic warming http://t.co/5MVHhFaL8n #springerlink
null hypothesis that global warming is caused by natural variability REJECTED at significance level of 99%. http://t.co/PNp8C8CB9h
Climate Dynamics article: Rejects #climatechange as caused by #natural variability hypothesis at 99% confidence http://t.co/ENasgaHEzh
McGill University prof S.Lovejoy rejects theory of #ClimateChange as natural fluctuation. http://t.co/6GF8gYY8gg http://t.co/IQOip3zC3j
Hi @GalileoMovement this paper rejects natural variability hypothesis at confidence >99% http://t.co/w3Xz4mUMk7
Hi @GalileoMovement this paper rejects natural variability hypothesis at confidence >99% http://t.co/w3Xz4mUMk7
“Even in the most unfavourable cases, we may reject the natural variability hypothesis at confidence levels >99 %” http://t.co/sN6bdL7eT8
Likelihood climate change is human caused, not natural, is 99%, say scientists #mtpol #mtclimate http://t.co/bvYQSkzfXE
Can we get legitimate science standards in our classrooms now @GovMattMead? #letourkidscompete http://t.co/guOpaz2NAs http://t.co/AiYOsquWOB
Prof @LovejoyShaun's work on (im)probability of natural warming doesn't use fancy models: http://t.co/3yCcYm8kGR Or: http://t.co/BS0SdDQKBq
"Scaling fluctuation analysis and statistical hypothesis testing of anthropogenic warming" by S. Lovejoy -- http://t.co/ac3RLLTs4l
I'm reading Scaling fluctuation analysis and statistical hypothesis testing of anthropogenic warming http://t.co/u2cR9keToH #springerlink
" we may reject the natural variability hypothesis at confidence levels >99 %." http://t.co/d2U4f1VjTL #climate
Scaling fluctuation analysis and statistical hypothesis testing of anthropogenic warming http://t.co/MIlXEglPQV