Here we go again.....
I just posted yesterday that NASA entirely REVERSES a "well established FACT" (according to liberals for the last 30 years) that Anarctic Ice was "melting" (after all there's the wonderful time lapse videos showing it, proof after all), they now say it's NOT melting but GAINING ICE..... but yet, they STILL try to claim that actual is ALSO causing global warming by some amazing rationalizing gymnastics. And like the "force" wave of the hand, them saying that causes the liberal brain to completely ignore the "clear truth" that was said before. After all, that you can screw up something like whether Ice is disappearing or not is telling.
Now we have NASA also entirely admiting that a part of pollution in the air is in fact a "cooling" agent, not a warming agent, and that they haven't done enough study to determine that cooling effect. But that's not all..... they do exactly like they did above, and instead try to claim it's STILL WARMING! Not only that, but the numbers are WORSE then they previously thought. The utter gymnastics of that is astounding.
by the way, those of us actual intelligent people already knew pollution was actually a "cooler" not a heater, because pollution especially if it's seen blocks out the Suns rays. Now, it's true in some select geography's such as a city in a Mountain range hole, that can also "trap" heat from the city, but that's only temporary and it's certainly not wide spread through the world, and city's just don't get that hot for very long. The hotest city, you block the sun some, it's going to fairly quick get colder. But more importantly, a hot city isn't "global warming".... LOL
Anyway, if you guys can't see yet how much you've been coned by these so-called "scientists" all these years, then there is simply no hope for you, you are tossed to and fro by whatever people say, not having a brain of your own.
Here are some telling quotes of what they admit....
"Because earlier studies do not account for what amounts to a net cooling effect for parts of the northern hemisphere, predictions for TCR and ECS have been lower than they should be."
The study found existing models for climate change had been too simplistic and did not account for these factors.
"As part of that calculation, researchers have relied on simplifying assumptions when accounting for the temperature impacts of climate drivers other than carbon dioxide, such as tiny particles in the atmosphere known as aerosols, for example.
"The assumptions made to account for these drivers are too simplistic and result in incorrect estimates of TCR and ECS."