His data suggests that the rate of rise in ocean temperatures can not possibly be due to man made circumstances and is instead due to earth core leakage.
He seems to believe that humankind will have a smooth and linear effect on the climate, and that if we've had a smooth and linear effect in the past, it will always remain smooth and linear. The climate is complex enough that tipping points can exist.
This is such a poor interpretation of the data that it almost seems intentional.
They're cherry-picking an arbitrary year for comparison over an arbitrary time range. There's many years you can select to draw similar bad comparisons. For example, select 2021 & 2015 and look at Feb 28 - March 5. Are you going to believe a sensationalist claim that "90% of SST rise between 2021 & 2015 arrived in 2 weeks"?
Hopefully not, because that's a bad comparison and ignores that temperature fluctuates up and down
This is a classic math pitfall, described by mathematician Jordan Ellenberg as "Don’t talk about percentages of numbers when the numbers might be negative" because they're more often confusing than illuminating.
Yes, let's shut down the contrarians by making fun of them or calling them words, there is clearly no room to discuss complex phenomena, as we have learned in the last few years dealing with COVID-19 "misinformation".
There certainly is no room to discuss them on Twitter. If the Twitter person has real data they should try writing a paper. There are about eight billion people who would love to see the CO2-theory of climate change falsified. They'd be a hero, trillions of dollars of unnecessary investment prevented, everybody rejoices.
His data is the data from the website this HN thread links to.
He's just pointing out that 32% of Sea Surface Temperature (SST) warming since 1995 arrived in a mere 3 weeks of 2023 and asks the question how that is possible.
Right, and then they propose an alternative theory. Time to collect evidence, perhaps code up a model, compute some errors bars and submit it to peer review. You know, build a case why your theory is better than what we have so far. Right now they have about as much substance as my suggestion with the Lizard people has.
OP wouldn’t be so skeptical except for the fact that 99% of scientists have been raising the alarm bells about climate change for 50 years and mainly politicians and commentators, often with little to no expertise and significantly biased due to fossil fuel connections and donations, have been questioning and undermining the science.
I think that just demonstrates the point that maybe scientists put too much emphasis on the science itself when what really matters is influencing people.