Ah yes, approximation is not a record therefore we cannot consider it a factor at all, regardless of it being our best estimate given our current data. You’re right, let’s throw it all out and opt for ignorance. 🙄
i suggested no such thing, you made that last part up for yourself.
i am just highlighting that comparing data from different sources/methods of collection is not proper apples to apples comparison. but sure have a melt down over it lol
No you’re acting like we can’t use this as a data point when it’s the data we have. It may not align apples to apples, but we have a recognizable trend that aligns with/exceeds predictions. I don’t see the point in doubting the data we have.
I don’t mean digital. Just daily readings with a thermometer across the globe v 1cm or whatever per year of a core reading for that location or a few of them.
Ah yes, approximation is not a record therefore we cannot consider it a factor at all, regardless of it being our best estimate given our current data. You’re right, let’s throw it all out and opt for ignorance. 🙄
i suggested no such thing, you made that last part up for yourself.
i am just highlighting that comparing data from different sources/methods of collection is not proper apples to apples comparison. but sure have a melt down over it lol
No you’re acting like we can’t use this as a data point when it’s the data we have. It may not align apples to apples, but we have a recognizable trend that aligns with/exceeds predictions. I don’t see the point in doubting the data we have.
I’m sure we would take ice samples from the modern era, ya know if any new ice was being deposited. Other systems are pretty easy to correlate 1:1.
Just because something isn’t digital doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or we can’t take observations from it.
I don’t mean digital. Just daily readings with a thermometer across the globe v 1cm or whatever per year of a core reading for that location or a few of them.
How far are you planning on moving those goal posts?