A school kid corrected NASA

BBC News

UK schoolboy corrects Nasa data error

The A-level student noticed something odd in radiation levels from the International Space Station.

7 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You also need to check out the Dunning-Kruger effect

........and sealioning.

Key Findings on Scientific Consensus:

• 97-99.9% Agreement: Multiple studies confirm that the overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that human activity is the primary cause of global warming.

• Expert Agreement: A 2021 study found that among over 88,000 climate-related papers, more than 99% of scientists agree on climate change.

• Global Organizations: Leading scientific bodies worldwide, including the United Nations IPCC and national academies of science, agree that human-caused climate change is happening.

• Public Misperception: While the scientific consensus is over 99%, the general public often underestimates this, believing the consensus is closer to 65%.

They can't even agree on where the forests are 5555

https://news.mongabay.com/2026/02/scientists-cant-agree-on-where-the-worlds-forests-are/

5 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

That is AI which is not scientific.

You are confusing message and messenger – my intelligence is not artificial; it is very real. You need to understand the difference between a search engine, a search and a source...and then how to construct

18 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Where do you get the 99.9% from?

People who “sealion” on forums often remind me of children in the classic “why?” phase.

Around ages 2–3 (peaking roughly 30–36 months and often continuing to 4 or 5), children discover that asking “why?” is powerful. It grabs adult attention. Although it reflects rapid cognitive development as they’re trying to understand cause and effect, test boundaries, practise language, assert a bit of control, and genuinely make sense of the world and is  a healthy, normal milestone —  if it  feels relentless but some toddlers find it works as a tool to attract the attention of (unsuspecting) adults

Sealioning version is a similar form of passive aggression adopted by “adults” — repetitive questions, requests for clarification, demands for “just one more explanation.” But unlike a three-year-old exploring the world, the sealioner often already has the answer in front of them. The questions aren’t about understanding; they’re about prolonging engagement, shifting the burden, or wearing someone down.

With children, a good tactic is to ask, “What do you think?” or give a simple, direct answer and move on.

So perhaps you should say what you think to avoid childish interchange?

Just now, kwilco said:

You are confusing message and messenger – my intelligence is not artificial; it is very real. You need to understand the difference between a search engine, a search and a source...and then how to construct

People who “sealion” on forums often remind me of children in the classic “why?” phase.

Around ages 2–3 (peaking roughly 30–36 months and often continuing to 4 or 5), children discover that asking “why?” is powerful. It grabs adult attention. Although it reflects rapid cognitive development as they’re trying to understand cause and effect, test boundaries, practise language, assert a bit of control, and genuinely make sense of the world and is  a healthy, normal milestone —  if it  feels relentless but some toddlers find it works as a tool to attract the attention of (unsuspecting) adults

Sealioning version is a similar form of passive aggression adopted by “adults” — repetitive questions, requests for clarification, demands for “just one more explanation.” But unlike a three-year-old exploring the world, the sealioner often already has the answer in front of them. The questions aren’t about understanding; they’re about prolonging engagement, shifting the burden, or wearing someone down.

With children, a good tactic is to ask, “What do you think?” or give a simple, direct answer and move on.

So perhaps you should say what you think to avoid childish interchange?

You sound very ignorant and poorly read. Scientists only agree 26% of the time on where the forests are.

I bet in real life you have spoken to no climate scientists and asked their actual opinion.

Climate scientist, says there is no consensus!

https://americanmind.org/salvo/manufacturing-consensus-on-climate-change/

7 minutes ago, kwilco said:

are confusing message and messenger – my intelligence is not artificial; it is very real. You need to understand the difference between a search engine, a search and a source...and then how to construct

I proved you wrong with links written on science. Did you ever study science at any level? Have you never researched both sides of it? An intelligent person would study both sides of it. The 99.9% claim is what an uninformed person would say in 2005. After 21 years you have not even done basic research on the topic.

4 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Climate scientist, says there is no consensus!

https://americanmind.org/salvo/manufacturing-consensus-on-climate-change/

You need to be very careful about cherry-picking.

The Claremont Institute is an influential American conservative think tank based in Upland, California, founded in 1979 by students of Harry V. Jaffa. Dedicated to restoring the principles of the American Founding, it acts as a "nerve center" for intellectual, nationalist, and right-wing conservatism, focusing on the "battle of ideas" against modern liberalism, the administrative state, and progressivism. Harry Victor Jaffa (October 7, 1918 – January 10, 2015) was an American political philosopher, historian, columnist - not a scientist.

Have you looked up Dunning-Kruger yet?

Imagine you’re driving through Thailand and you come to a bridge.
There’s a large warning sign:

“97% of structural engineers agree this bridge will collapse under the weight of your car.”

If 97% of engineers say the bridge will collapse, only a fool calls it a “fear campaign” and drives on.

1 minute ago, kwilco said:

ypou need to be very careful about cherrypicking

The Claremont Institute is an influential American conservative think tank based in Upland, California, founded in 1979 by students of Harry V. Jaffa. Dedicated to restoring the principles of the American Founding, it acts as a "nerve center" for intellectual, nationalist, and right-wing conservatism, focusing on the "battle of ideas" against modern liberalism, the administrative state, and progressivism

The author is a well published climate scientist. You have never spoken to one and never even bothered to research the topic beyond google.

Just now, kwilco said:

Imagine you’re driving through Thailand and you come to a bridge.
There’s a large warning sign:

“97% of structural engineers agree this bridge will collapse under the weight of your car.”

If 97% of engineers say the bridge will collapse, only a fool calls it a “fear campaign” and drives on.

97% of climate scientists don't agree. You are back in 2005. I can't believe you have learnt nothing in 21 years.

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Have you looked up Dunning-Kruger yet?

I can see you are 100% biased, poorly read and not progressed since 2005.

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2719747/

15 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

You sound very ignorant and poorly read. Scientists only agree 26% of the time on where the forests are.

I bet in real life you have spoken to no climate scientists and asked their actual opinion.

Pot calling out from behind the building stratocumulus.

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Pot calling out from behind the building stratocumulus.

Why is it scientists only agree on 26% of forest location?

1 minute ago, khaosokman said:

Why is it scientists only agree on 26% of forest location?

maybe because they are scientists and probably know more than you and I about it!

1 minute ago, scottiejohn said:

maybe because they are scientists and probably know more than you and I about it!

So 74% of the time they disagree because they are idiots then.

13 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

I can see you are 100% biased, poorly read and not progressed since 2005.

When will you start to progress from making such asinine comments?

1 minute ago, scottiejohn said:

When will you start to progress from making such asinine comments?

Post a science link from last year.

17 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

97% of climate scientists don't agree. You are back in 2005. I can't believe you have learnt nothing in 21 years.

8 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Why is it scientists only agree on 26% of forest location?

Make your mind up please!

Just now, scottiejohn said:

Make your mind up please!

Two unrelated quotes put together. I see you know nothing about climate.

14 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Post a science link from last year.

Why just from last year?

Some inflammatory posts and replies have been removed:

• You will not post troll messages. Trolling is the act of purposefully antagonizing forum members by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other members into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

10 hours ago, kwilco said:

Imagine you’re driving through Thailand and you come to a bridge.
There’s a large warning sign:

“97% of structural engineers agree this bridge will collapse under the weight of your car.”

If 97% of engineers say the bridge will collapse, only a fool calls it a “fear campaign” and drives on.

The world population has increased 2.2bn in 26 years.

If carbon dioxide is so dangerous why aren't people dying in their millions?

13 hours ago, mordothailand said:

no it doesnt, it is primarily the poles that warms in a warmer world, less temperature gradients. climate 101

Australia has seen significant record-breaking heat just within the last few weeks. The summer of 2025–2026 has been particularly brutal, with multiple all-time state and local records falling during a major heatwave in late January and early February.

Major Records Broken (Jan–Feb 2026)

• Victoria’s All-Time Record: On January 27, 2026, the towns of Walpeup and Hopetoun reached 48.9°C (120.0°F). This officially broke the previous Victorian state record of 48.8°C set in 2009.

• Hitting the 50°C Mark: Temperatures reached a staggering 50.0°C (122.0°F) in Andamooka (Jan 29) and Port Augusta (Jan 30) in South Australia. This is only the 8th and 9th time in recorded history that the 50°C threshold has been hit in Australia.

• High-Altitude Records: Even the alpine regions saw unprecedented heat. Falls Creek (Victoria) recorded its first-ever 30-degree day (30.5°C) in 36 years of records, while Perisher Valley (NSW) hit 30.8°C, its hottest day in half a century.

5 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Australia has seen significant record-breaking heat just within the last few weeks. The summer of 2025–2026 has been particularly brutal, with multiple all-time state and local records falling during a major heatwave in late January and early February.

Major Records Broken (Jan–Feb 2026)

• Victoria’s All-Time Record: On January 27, 2026, the towns of Walpeup and Hopetoun reached 48.9°C (120.0°F). This officially broke the previous Victorian state record of 48.8°C set in 2009.

• Hitting the 50°C Mark: Temperatures reached a staggering 50.0°C (122.0°F) in Andamooka (Jan 29) and Port Augusta (Jan 30) in South Australia. This is only the 8th and 9th time in recorded history that the 50°C threshold has been hit in Australia.

• High-Altitude Records: Even the alpine regions saw unprecedented heat. Falls Creek (Victoria) recorded its first-ever 30-degree day (30.5°C) in 36 years of records, while Perisher Valley (NSW) hit 30.8°C, its hottest day in half a century.

The highest temperature ever recorded in Australia is 50.7 °C (123.3 °F), which was recorded on 2 January 1960 at Oodnadatta, South Australia, and 13 January 2022 at Onslow, Western Australia.

10 hours ago, khaosokman said:

Why is it scientists only agree on 26% of forest location?

Because they can't see the wood for the trees?

The highest temperature ever recorded in New South Wales is 50.1 degrees recorded in Wilcannia on January 11, 1939.

Why was it hotter in 1939 than 2025?

6 hours ago, khaosokman said:

The highest temperature ever recorded in New South Wales is 50.1 degrees recorded in Wilcannia on January 11, 1939.

Why was it hotter in 1939 than 2025?

You have a single data point against a swag of tumbling heat records, Mr. Cherrypicker. Attend a science class sometime, and learn about thermodynamics.

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

You have a single data point against a swag of tumbling heat records, Mr. Cherrypicker. Attend a science class sometime, and learn about thermodynamics.

Phuket Airport temperatures have cooled since 2001. That is over 20 years of data. Most Thai cities have shown cooling since 2010 or 2001 as well.

You can't explain it and nor can anyone else. You even falsely claimed warming was universal but we knew decades ago it warms more at the poles.

7 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Australia has seen significant record-breaking heat just within the last few weeks. The summer of 2025–2026 has been particularly brutal, with multiple all-time state and local records falling during a major heatwave in late January and early February.

Major Records Broken (Jan–Feb 2026)

• Victoria’s All-Time Record: On January 27, 2026, the towns of Walpeup and Hopetoun reached 48.9°C (120.0°F). This officially broke the previous Victorian state record of 48.8°C set in 2009.

• Hitting the 50°C Mark: Temperatures reached a staggering 50.0°C (122.0°F) in Andamooka (Jan 29) and Port Augusta (Jan 30) in South Australia. This is only the 8th and 9th time in recorded history that the 50°C threshold has been hit in Australia.

• High-Altitude Records: Even the alpine regions saw unprecedented heat. Falls Creek (Victoria) recorded its first-ever 30-degree day (30.5°C) in 36 years of records, while Perisher Valley (NSW) hit 30.8°C, its hottest day in half a century.

https://macaubusiness.com/sweden-sees-record-cold-as-temperatures-plunge-below-40-celsius/

“It is the lowest temperature that has been recorded in this specific spot since measurements began” at the site in 1888, he said.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/sweden-ap-denmark-swedish-lapland-copenhagen-b2472544.html

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/canadas-coldest-temperature-in-50-years

you were saying ?