brocollis not really real. someone came along & made it up. a long time ago. itsa big bouquet a flowers. but if u sent it to me ♥ ? id be like...well lets just say id go....hmmm.
They didn't make it up. They just harvested the plant before it bloomed. Much of what we eat would be something else if we let it alone. All fruits are wombs for seeds.
Veal would grow up to be beef.
Caviar > fish.
Chicken eggs > you get the picture
[snip]
So if global climate cannot be experienced locally, there is nothing to worry about.
This is brilliant. So I can book my summer holiday in Death Valley because it doesn't experience Antarctic weather, and then have a winter one at the South Pole because it doesn't experience Death Valley temperatures.
Sometimes you say such dumb things, and always stick firmly to them.
No, that would be local climate, not global climate. The claim was that GLOBAL climate cannot be experienced locally.
If you want to book a vacation you would do so based on the local climate, NOT the global climate.
But those are local climates, not global ones. Nobody is suggesting that the local climate in Antarctica can be experienced in the locality of Multnomah County. The claim was that GLOBAL climate (not local climate) cannot be experienced locally.
So if global climate cannot be experienced locally, there is nothing to worry about.
Incorrect. You mistake a statement of the obvious fact that no one can experience the climate all over the world from one small location to mean that change in global climate cannot affect that small location. Less precipitation in the Rocky Mountains in British Columbia and in the Cascade Range could dramatically lower the flow of water in your area and affect your ability to irrigate your land.
Well I'm confused. The examples you gave, in my opinion, were local climates. But you say "incorrect". Are the examples you gave global climates???
as I said - boondoggles with 'local' versus 'global'.
Most people know that climate and weather vary around the world geographically and also that climate and weather vary with time too.
Including the one billion + people who disagree that manmade climate change disasters are a thing.
They know about variations in climate and weather around the world and with time too.
In order to remain in 'comfortable' disagreement though - they don't want to look or feel like flat-earthers.
So they've got to take 'regional manmade climate disasters' out of play right away.
By whatever means.
'No no! Chemtrails! '
'No! Me! So it 'doesn't matter'! '
'No! The disasters aren't happening! Or would happen anyway!'
'conditional' tactics. A or B. Invalid bait and switch tactics. 'Heads I win Tails you lose.'
It's just a clear lack of understanding about what a statistic even is. It doesn't matter if it's local or global. You cannot individually have an experience that is statistically significant. Outliers and exceptions exist. Trends and data about larger sets of information are valid regardless.
Broccoli with chicken or beef stir-fried is known for its balance of fresh vegetables and protein
It's just a clear lack of understanding about what a statistic even is. It doesn't matter if it's local or global. You cannot individually have an experience that is statistically significant. Outliers and exceptions exist. Trends and data about larger sets of information are valid regardless.
AI Overview
A statistic is a numerical value calculated from a sample of data that is used to understand or describe a larger population. It's a summary measure that provides information about a specific characteristic of the sample, such as the average, the spread, or the proportion. Essentially, it's a tool for making inferences about a population based on a smaller, representative group.
But those are local climates, not global ones. Nobody is suggesting that the local climate in Antarctica can be experienced in the locality of Multnomah County. The claim was that GLOBAL climate (not local climate) cannot be experienced locally.
So if global climate cannot be experienced locally, there is nothing to worry about.
Incorrect. You mistake a statement of the obvious fact that no one can experience the climate all over the world from one small location to mean that change in global climate cannot affect that small location. Less precipitation in the Rocky Mountains in British Columbia and in the Cascade Range could dramatically lower the flow of water in your area and affect your ability to irrigate your land.
Well I'm confused. The examples you gave, in my opinion, were local climates. But you say "incorrect". Are the examples you gave global climates???
Yes, climate varies from place to place. As the overall climate of planet Earth changes (as you repeatedly point out it does) then local climates will be affected, in different ways. Whether or not you can see the change in global climate from your front porch doesn't mean it will not affect you, so yes, global climate change is something to worry about.
If you mean something else by "global climate" please explain.
But those are local climates, not global ones. Nobody is suggesting that the local climate in Antarctica can be experienced in the locality of Multnomah County. The claim was that GLOBAL climate (not local climate) cannot be experienced locally.
So if global climate cannot be experienced locally, there is nothing to worry about.
Incorrect. You mistake a statement of the obvious fact that no one can experience the climate all over the world from one small location to mean that change in global climate cannot affect that small location. Less precipitation in the Rocky Mountains in British Columbia and in the Cascade Range could dramatically lower the flow of water in your area and affect your ability to irrigate your land.
Well I'm confused. The examples you gave, in my opinion, were local climates. But you say "incorrect". Are the examples you gave global climates???
Yes, climate varies from place to place. As the overall climate of planet Earth changes (as you repeatedly point out it does) then local climates will be affected, in different ways. Whether or not you can see the change in global climate from your front porch doesn't mean it will not affect you, so yes, global climate change is something to worry about.
If you mean something else by "global climate" please explain.
OK. So your answer to my question is "yes". The examples you gave are in fact global climates. The local rainfall, the local heat, those are global climates.
So if the examples you gave are indeed global climates how in the world does the claim that global climates cannot be experienced locally make any sense? I mean AT ALL?
You gave examples of local climates, local situations, local weather. And you are saying "yes" those are examples of global climate. And yet, somehow, that local (global} climate cannot be experienced locally???
If local climate cannot be experienced locally, which climate exactly CAN by experienced locally?
Someone needs to explain things using single syllables or the happily illiterates will run you in circles asking deep questions like "huh?".
Perhaps @IfPatriotGame will understand another analogy.
Suppose a country has an average income of $80,000. Suppose you are one of the unfortunate ones who earns 0$. Are you experiencing the "global" average income? Is anyone else (with earnings between $0 and some obscene number of billions experiencing the global statistic? Obviously not, but they are related in an asymmetric way.
The relationship is actually that ALL the local statistics determine the global statistic, and the global statistic has a statistical influence on the local statistics - eg if the average is higher, individual ones tend to be higher.
And that, as I said before, seems to be going beyond the understanding of @IfPatriotGames, and she needs to either accept the previous paragraph or acknowledge lack of understanding.
It's just a clear lack of understanding about what a statistic even is. It doesn't matter if it's local or global. You cannot individually have an experience that is statistically significant. Outliers and exceptions exist. Trends and data about larger sets of information are valid regardless.
Just for fun I typed into Bing the question "can global climate be experienced locally".
The top result that came back was "while climate change is a global phenomenon it is experienced locally". But who knows, maybe the internet is wrong. That happens from time to time.
I suppose someone could say climate change is experienced locally, which is why I asked Fester that question. Of course, he refused to answer because he knew he couldn't. Maybe he thinks climate cannot be experienced locally, but climate change CAN. My guess is that the climateers will insist global climate is the average long term condition of weather all over the world, and only local weather can be experienced locally. If that's the case they would have to concede that neither climate, nor climate change, can be experienced locally. And if climate change cannot be experienced locally, it cannot be experienced at all, which makes all of this hullabaloo about climate change all over nothing.
Perhaps @IfPatriotGame will understand another analogy.
Suppose a country has an average income of $80,000. Suppose you are one of the unfortunate ones who earns 0$. Are you experiencing the "global" average income? Is anyone else (with earnings between $0 and some obscene number of billions experiencing the global statistic? Obviously not, but they are related in an asymmetric way.
The relationship is actually that ALL the local statistics determine the global statistic, and the global statistic has a statistical influence on the local statistics - eg if the average is higher, individual ones tend to be higher.
And that, as I said before, seems to be going beyond the understanding of @IfPatriotGames, and she needs to either accept the previous paragraph or acknowledge lack of understanding.
I never mentioned anything about statistics. I don't think anyone else did either. Not sure why that's even being brought up. That could be a different topic for a different conversation though.
Fester insisted, and you seemed to agree, that global climate cannot be experienced locally. Nobody ever said anything about statistics. Mpaetz even brought up some local examples of climate, no statistics that I recall.
teal is 75%, blue, 25% yellow. Any color over 50% blue can be referred to as a shade of blue
interesting u say such dum-dum things. teals SOOO much more than exactly 75-25. and shade ? ...is when u add black to it. which u havent. tell me s/t. which bzzzt taught u abt color ?? ...and why didju bleeve them ??
warrants much higher precision
which u so desperately need.
brocolli can be teal...heres uncle at the brocolli-wocolli convention in las vegas last week →
Contrary to what some people suggest, not responding to a stupid question does not transfer the stupidy to the non-responder.
That remains with the questioner.
Repeating the premise of the stupid question repeatedly magnifies the stupidy to ever higher levels.
brocolli can be teal...heres uncle at the brocolli-wocolli convention in las vegas last week →
That actually does resemble me but broccoli is green. I won't present color wheel evidence or the creation of green.
teals (tertiary) base (primary) color is actually yellow (secondary). so ur both wrong.
If someone makes an argument and says something was blue in passing, and it has no effect on the point being made, saying it is teal is pedantic and does nothing for the argument itself. If the first person were to then turn around and say "it's not actually teal, the RGB value when sampled is is actually #007878, not #008080", they would be equally pedantic and the end effect would be that everyone in the discussion would end up having to refer to basic color descriptions with ridiculous precision. Even then someone is bound to point out that based on a person's monitor settings they are not seeing the exact color described anyway and cannot make a judgment...
As I said, this tactic is used to save face when losing an argument.
P.S. If anyone is going to try and be more pedantic now...teal is 75%, blue, 25% yellow. Any color over 50% blue can be referred to as a shade of blue, and so a person calling teal blue is correct unless the discussion warrants much higher precision.