Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Fact Checking NASA
- Bob G on Fact Checking The New York Times
- Bob G on Fact Checking The New York Times
- Bob G on Fact Checking The New York Times
- Bob G on Fact Checking The New York Times
- arn on Fact Checking The New York Times
- conrad ziefle on Fact Checking The New York Times
- arn on Fact Checking The New York Times
- Bob G on Fact Checking The New York Times
- conrad ziefle on Fact Checking The New York Times
After a slight dip, there is possibly a sustained increase, only the weather knows for sure.
I understand trends. But why do so many of these climate scientists want to draw straight lines through what is obviously oscillations?
Reminds me of a fast train to nowhere. Or running in place.
They never expected this. If it continues they have a lot of questions to answer.
Check out the minimums on the graph in recent years.