Holy shit lol ! Isn ' t that the one that they kept from airing in west ? <| sep |> Well I asked for water , and they offered me a small or large . So I took the large because I was pretty thirsty . <| sep |> One will give you what the sensor reads . An ir thermometer on the thermostat housing will tell you a rough temp . <| sep |> Didn ' t expect someone would answer . Thank you for your input . If you don ' t mind I have a few questions . This is physics , it isn ' t based only on observational climate data . Can you elaborate the physics part ? These records cover millions of years of Earth ' s climate history . Is it fair to compare current data to historical data given that accuracy diminishes the further we look back ? Our records of past climates are also far more reliable than you reckon . How far can we look back while maintaining relatively similar degree of accuracy ? I understand we can ' t look too far back . . temperature from Greenland and Antarctic ice cores . I ' ve read about those and immediately I had a question . What about ice core extractions from the other side of the world ? . climate model reconstructions . Don ' t get me wrong , I love working with data and trying to extrapolate past and future events . However , climate models similarly to financial models have a high degree of uncertainty or so called black swan events that cannot be predicted . What are the chances that one black swan event hasn ' t occurred e . g . meteor crash in the arctic region and as a result skewed the result ? . temperatures from tree rings . I ' ve been very skeptical of this . Maybe because I don ' t understand the significance of it nor have properly researched it . However , how many trees are there that are older than 200 years and are accessible for scientists to take pieces out of them for the purpose of observing its rings ? . sea level from corals . How old are the oldest corals ? Look , I am not a climate change denier . That would be mental . Of course it ' s happening and it can be observed just by looking at satellite images or the weather channel . What I am concerned about is the application of climate related data in current models and drawing conclusions and I ' ll explain why . Long before graduating I became interested in simulations . I ended up becoming a business consultant and my job involves looking at financial and business models of SME ' s with reading occasional reports of large enterprises and financial markets part of my education . What baffles me is that most models suck at risk mitigation thus , assigning very low probability of black swan events . In reality , however , they occur more often than not . It ' s basically wishful thinking combined with internal politics . I understand the reasoning behind it . If you assign excessive risk levels to certain events , you can ' t spend that much money and you ' re potentially limiting your potential growth . Also , other companies are likely to be more risk tolerant and you ' re basically forced to overlook some risks such as black swan events game theory and you must not forget the impact a good old fashioned What are you , a pussy ? can bring . Since people suck at modelling systems they themselves have created , what are the chances our climate models are utterly wrong when you start to extrapolate them ? It might be an induction fallacy from my side but I ' m willing to gamble internet points on it . I am genuinely interested in hearing your comments . Let me know if you need any clarification . Also , my initial comment was a honey pot .