ProfessionalInternetCommentator

@Liveleigh1 @TheDisproof Natural 98% of what? You don't specify. Can't be the amount of warming that is natural, because that's false, so perhaps is the amount of climate change deniers who talk about it based only on debunked fossil fuel industry manipulated graphs.

@TheDisproof So the natural 98% isn't a worry? Phew! I can drop the guilt and virtue signalling then.

Great reporting and well done WMO. By the way ENSO, (El Nino and La Nina) redistributes energy in Earth's systems without adding to the total, while fossil fuel emissions do add to the total in Earth's systems.

@Deming_WE @ecodiuku Y ojo que es proyección 2035. Pero se ve que ni el escenario es el mismo para cada región/país, ni creo que se pueda resumir todo a un solo número.

@Deming_WE @ecodiuku Hay muchas maneras de medir los costes de la electricidad, suficientes como para que quien quiera encuentre la que más le beneficia, y me dan algo de tiricia los absolutos, más cuando vienen de gente como Lomborg. Esto es del informe 2025 de la IEA

Llevo tiempo diciendo que la desinformación climática y energética ya no viene de cuatro negacionistas anónimos, si no de lobbies retardistas ultraliberales especializados en la materia. Para muestra, un botón:

@Deming_WE @ecodiuku Estarian mejor fuentes algo más revisadas. Más que nada porque si el argumento es que hay retardistas que dicen lo que les da la gana, si aportas una entrada de blog escrita por uno de los mayores retardistas pues no sé se es un buen contrajemmplo.

@ecodiuku Hay muchas fuentes que validan que el coste energético es mayor cuanto más energía renovables hay en el mix stephenheins.substack.com/p/green-electr…

Climate change denier and fake scientist Jonathan Cohler wrote a AI assisted "paper" with more flaws than a 20 dollar diamond. It is debunked in full here thebulletin.org/2026/03/a-clar…

@Gerry__Fabian @Mycroft_Smart1 @JamieBonkiewicz Please stop with the bullshit "my coworker uncle was hit by a car and they put COVID in the death certificate". Again. Everyone moved out of that conspiracy. Go look for chemtrails.

@Mycroft_Smart1 @PComentator @JamieBonkiewicz He died with covid. He did not die by covid. Learn to use your deductive process.

@DonsEarBandage @ryankatzrosene Science it's based on data, analysis and evidence. Pseudoskepticism may be based on YouTube videos from Ian Plimer.

@ryankatzrosene Science is based on scepticism - not on blindly following arrogant ideologues like you youtube.com/watch?v=8kNvSu…

Climate skeptics see dead people

The claim that “CO₂ always lags temperature” is a myth based on local Antarctic ice-core data, not global climate reconstructions. This misconception was popularised by fossil-fuel propaganda such as the polemic film The Great Global Warming Swindle, which misrepresented the research of Nicolas Caillon et al. (2003). The film cherry-picked a single Antarctic deglaciation event while ignoring the broader climate context and even the paper’s own conclusion: “Finally, the situation at Termination III differs from the recent anthropogenic CO₂ increase.” science.org/doi/full/10.11… In glacial cycles, small changes in Earth’s orbit (Milankovitch cycles) initially warmed parts of the Southern Hemisphere. That warming caused the oceans to release CO₂, which then spread through the atmosphere and amplified warming globally. When global temperature reconstructions are examined instead of a single Antarctic record, the picture changes completely. "Global warming preceded by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations during the last deglaciation" -Shakun et al. (2012) "the small apparent lead of Antarctic temperature over CO₂in the ice core records does not apply to global temperature." nature.com/articles/natur… Their global reconstruction found that CO₂ increases PRECEDED about 93% of the total global warming during the last deglaciation. In other words: Antarctica warmed first locally due to orbital forcing, but rising CO₂ drove most of the subsequent global warming. --- Earth’s geological history confirms that atmospheric CO₂ has been a major DRIVER of global temperature for hundreds of millions of years. Multiple independent paleoclimate reconstructions consistently find a strong coupling between CO₂ levels and global temperature: “Atmospheric CO₂ exerts a dominant control on GMST, both today and in the geologic past.” -Judd et al. (2024) “CO₂ is a greenhouse gas that has played an important, if not the predominant role, in regulating Earth’s temperature through time.” - Scotese et al. (2021/2022) “The concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide is a fundamental driver of climate.” - Cenozoic CO2 Proxy Integration Project (2023) “CO₂ and climate are coupled throughout the past 66 million years.” -Rae et al. (2021) “We find a strong relationship between CO₂ forcing and temperature from the proxy data.” -Mills et al. (2019) “The evolution of Earth’s climate on geological timescales is largely driven by variations in solar irradiance and changes in greenhouse gas concentrations.” -Foster et al. (2017) “CO₂ as a primary driver of Phanerozoic climate.” Royer et al (2004) “CO₂-forced climate thresholds during the Phanerozoic.” -Royer (2006) “There is indeed a correlation between CO₂ and paleotemperature, as manifested by the atmospheric greenhouse effect.” -Berner et al. (2001) Across multiple geological timescales, from the last deglaciation to the entire 540-million-year Phanerozoic, the scientific literature consistently finds that CO₂ and temperature are strongly linked. Claims that CO₂ cannot drive climate because it “lags temperature” in Antarctic ice cores ignore this enormous body of paleoclimate evidence. See links to papers in this thread: x.com/Ceist8/status/…

@Gerry__Fabian @Mycroft_Smart1 @JamieBonkiewicz Dude. It's 2026. Everyone has moved away from "died from/died with". Pick another conspiracy theory to focus on.

@Mycroft_Smart1 @JamieBonkiewicz Its cases. Show me anything. But you cannot. Not a thing. Not one speck of proof. They died by cancer. They died by falling off a ladder. They died by drowning. Show me the healthy person who died by covid. Just covid. Nothing else. Anyone.

@FreeThi56993890 @XochitlHinojosa Well, yes. The moral leves comes more from not being found guilty of several felonies 👍

Robert Mueller was a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart recipient. This is not how we treat a distinguished veteran, prosecutor and former FBI Director. This tweet is disgusting and grossly inappropriate. The irony is that while Mueller’s report had some shocking evidence, it did not recommend prosecuting Trump.

@MarcosSnchezMu1 @Thom_Merrillin @XMihura Ojalá no hubiese que justificarse delante de cada maniqueista que aprovecha la mínima para sacar el "ah, o sea que apoyas a los ayatolás"

@Thom_Merrillin @XMihura A ver, que justo el point de mis comentarios es distinguir entre regimen y nación, y he empezado siendo claramente muy critico con el regimen, que yo no apoyo en absoluto. Pero hay un motivo por el que incluso con regimenes muy odiados por sectores amplios de la pobl, como es

algunos van a descubrir que Irán no es como los regímenes bananeros a base de misilazos yo he trabajado con muxos iraníes, y tienen sus cositas, pero en general los hay muy competentes el régimen de los ayatolás lleva literalmente 20 años preparándose para este escenario cada vez pinta más claro que los americanos se han pasado de frenada en fin, trankilos que nothing ever happens

@david_hilderman @lePlaymobil28 @Ceist8 @ChrisGloninger Went from silly arguments to straight whataboutism.

@PComentator @lePlaymobil28 @Ceist8 @ChrisGloninger Ah yes. "Everyone" says the 0.7C warming from CO2 will create positive feedback as a result of reduced albeto from less ice cover and methane release from permafrost. Tell that to this petrified tree 100km into permafrost from 5000 yrs ago. Why isn't all life obliterated?

Jim, you just described the greenhouse effect while claiming to debunk it. Impressive.\ Yes, CO₂ absorbs infrared and re-emits it in all directions, including back toward Earth's surface. That downward re-emission is exactly what warms the planet. The word "trap" is shorthand for a process you just correctly described. Your own explanation is the mechanism. This is like arguing a wool blanket doesn't keep you warm because it doesn't "trap" heat - it just slows its escape in every direction including back at your body. "CO₂ re-emits in a millionth of a second" - correct. And then the O₂ and N₂ molecules that absorbed that energy via collision also re-emit. The atmosphere is dense. Photons don't escape to space on the first try. That's the entire point. "CO₂ is essential for cooling the Earth" - this is the only interesting part of your reply. CO₂ does radiate energy to space from the upper atmosphere. But as CO₂ increases, that emission layer rises to colder altitudes, which radiates less efficiently - net result: warming. This is radiative forcing 101. You didn't catch a half-truth. You described a physical process accurately, misread its implications, and called it a gotcha. The thermometers are not propagandists, Jim.

@M3othra012 @Ceist8 @sb559532603708 @ChrisGloninger @JunkScience It means it was an event of whatever constant heat content on the planet being redistributed to one part and later to another and not a global heat content increase, as it happens nowadays. And thus, using RWP to diminish global warming is a wrong argument.

@Ceist8 @sb559532603708 @ChrisGloninger @JunkScience “Not globally coherent” means did not occur at identical times at different places. As far as I can figure out it does not mean did not occur at all.

Hey @JunkScience — the study is about climate shifts 3 million years ago. You know what else was different 3 million years ago? Humans weren't burning 37 billion tons of CO2 per year. The Sun drives paleoclimate. Great. Here's what the Sun has been doing since 1980 while you've been writing "JunkScience": flat to slightly declining solar output. Meanwhile global temperatures have risen 0.6°C. The ocean isn't absorbing heat from the Sun - it's absorbing heat trapped by greenhouse gases. Ocean heat content has increased every single decade since the 1950s. We measure it. With instruments. Not vibes. Reading a Nature paper about what caused Ice Ages and concluding it debunks modern climate science is like reading a study about what caused the 1918 flu pandemic and declaring COVID doesn't exist. The ocean is warming because we're trapping heat in the atmosphere. The atmosphere is trapping heat because of CO2. The CO2 came from your friends in the fossil fuel industry. The Nature paper doesn't say any of what you claimed it says. You know that. Your followers don't. That's not climate science. That's the whole business model.

Todavía tengo que encontrar a alguien que se identifique con movimientos "red pill" en cualquier ámbito, que no de un poco de vergüenza ajena leerle o escucharle.

@lePlaymobil28 @Ceist8 @david_hilderman @ChrisGloninger But, it's another data point in my theory that anyone having a variation of "red pill" in the bio it's gonna say something really really wrong.

@lePlaymobil28 @Ceist8 @david_hilderman @ChrisGloninger It is a truly ridiculous argument, it shows how poorly people understand what really 1 or 2° warmer means for a planet. Also I don't think anyone has claimed a doubling of CO2 will result in just 0.5°C of increase. Everything points to way more increase.

@EyewallPaul @ChrisGloninger x.com/i/status/20345…

@PComentator @ChrisGloninger Except not at all. There is no empirical evidence that co2 controls the temperature in a chaotic non-linear system such as earths atmosphere, it’s not a jar.

0.04% of Earth's atmosphere is 3,300 BILLION tons of CO2. By this logic, the 0.0000005% of your bloodstream that's fentanyl isn't dangerous either. CO2 concentration has risen from 280 ppm before industrialization to 425 ppm today — a 52% increase in 150 years. The last time CO2 was this high, sea levels were 50-65 feet higher and the Arctic had forests instead of ice. Small concentrations drive massive outcomes. That's literally how chemistry works. Arsenic is about 0.00004% of your body weight. Carbon monoxide kills you at 0.02% of room air. The ozone layer that shields all life on Earth from UV radiation? 0.00006% of the atmosphere. "It's only 0.04%" is the flat earth of climate arguments — sounds superficially logical, collapses immediately on contact with actual science. CO2 doesn't need to be the dominant gas in the atmosphere to trap heat. It needs to absorb infrared radiation at the right wavelengths. It does. We've known this since Eunice Newton Foote measured it in 1856.

🥱👇

@DuncanCamp38543 @TakethatCt @Ffortescue3 Itrelevant. The patent still says it serves -and it's still used today- as a tool to diagnose infectious diseases

@TakethatCt @Ffortescue3 youtu.be/GSsNhJ99wSk?fe…

Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test said it did not diagnose disease. If they're using it to test for meningitis just like they did with 'Covid', you know it's DEFINITELY a scam.

This Nature paper, which is clearly a big hit with the usual suspects in the fossil fool community, finds that over the past ~3 million years, climate shifts weren’t always tightly coupled to CO₂, with oceans and ice sheets doing plenty of the work. Deniers immediately declare CO₂ irrelevant. Scientists note two awkward details: today's CO₂ spike is far faster and higher than anything in that record, and in past cycles temperature often rose first because warming oceans released CO₂, which then amplified and sustained the heat. This time we're doing the outgassing ourselves. Discovering that past climate was complicated is not proof that present climate change is imaginary, just that feedbacks exist, and we're currently pulling the biggest lever. nature.com/articles/s4158…