My discussion with John Robson in full -- (the one he doesn't want you to see!)

My favourite part is where the conversation goes:
"Go away."
Oh, sorry, I thought this channel was titled 'Climate Discussion Network'

I nearly choked on my coffee 🤣

so this is what arguing with a credible journalist looks like. Its actually kind of scary...good thing we dont have many credible journalists anymore

It's true that Arctic sea ice extant was higher in April 2024 than it has been in any April since 2015.
But it was also higher in April 2009 than it had been in any April since 2001, and higher in April 1999 than it had been in any April since 1993, and higher in 1993 than it had been since 1988.
And since each of those "rebounds" it has since declined to new lows and failed to "rebound" to the same level as the previous highs. So what Robson is doing is this little thing we call "cherry picking data". Even if we are in the middle of a rebound, it is too early to make that claim.
And here's a nice little data point. The dotted line on the graph is the record minimum where in September 2012 the Arctic ice extent was lower than any other recorded year. In that year, the ice extent in April was GREATER than in 2024.

I really want to see his videos now, but I don't want to give him the view, so I won't.

Instead I will add this comment to boost your viewer engagement :)

A polite term for John would be 'overconfident' - but even overconfident people would accept correction when their errors are pointed out. He is going out of his way to ignore information that counters his thesis.

Ah that music makes me feel so happy and relaxed.

People like John are either dishonest or stupid or perhaps both.

They likely have some ulterior motive for their denial efforts and denial. My general observation is that they want to side with the politicians who hold the same biases or agenda that they hold. They have a very cult like mindset.

Not quite Kendrick and Drake, but it'll do, pig. It'll do.

The thing that finally turned me off of these fake skeptics, is that they never explain anything. They only ever post vague rhetorical questions. In contrast, every time I read something from the other side, I learned something. So engaging with these people may seem like a running a hamster wheel, but it allows people who want to learn, to learn. Keep up the good work, Potholer54!

Oh dear. Ruining someone's perfectly good theory with politeness and nasty facts! How dare you???

He also replied to one of my comments. I showed him plainly and clearly in three different ways why "days in a year that are the highest in a decade" doesn't signify anything - it's just statistical noise.
I used his own interpretation of the data to show this... but he's still insisting that it's important. Either he doesn't understand, or his pride isn't letting him understand.

you didn't show the part where you were rude

I love the way potholer54 effortlessly explains to them their own climate-change denying "evidence". And they obviously just can't handle it when he confronts them with their own stupidity and makes the average layman on climate science look like a MENSA candidate in the subject by comparison to their idiotic "understanding" of it😆

You absolutely obliterated that fool.

A spectrograph? Is he just completely misusing that word? Lmao

> Posts a chart with swapped axes that make it so unreadable that he himself misinterprets it while editing
> his claims about the chart are basically impossible to read from the chart
> he gets sent a rotated version of the chart that is very easy to read
> the corrected version shows very clearly that there is a continuing downwards trend
> "you're just too stupid to read the version that I used in my video"

All too familiar, I've had pretty much the same experience with such people. The sad thing is that they either a) don't realize they are wrong or b) don't care, because the truth was never their goal.

What a pathetic liar

❤PH54🖖

I commend you on your patience. I found it infuriating just to read.
Thank you for what you do.

It's amazing how fragile he is.

This video give me happy feet.

I made a critical comment on the CDN website once and got a very unpleasant response from Robson. It seems to be his MO when encountering any opinion that counters the claims on his website.

Potholer, I do admire your constraint.

How can you argue with people who think it’s embarrassing and arrogant to think that a so called “climate change” is anthropomorphic…and gat the balls to invoke dunning-Kruger when you point out that it is?

l'd like to know what soundtrack is used.

Beautiful.
He knows its getting hotter;
Now his pants are on fire!

There can be no legitimate conversation about the climate , from any perspective, without first acknowledging the fully deployed global geo engineering programmes.
So, potholer, listen to the strains of Paul Whitman and his orchestra, while you look the other way.

Scientific drama 😂 i love it

Warmer air allows for more moisture in the air, even at -15C (which is quite warm for Antarctica). So any recent measure of MORE snow helps prove that the temperatures are going up. Sadly there comes a point where it's too warm to even snow.

You're more patient than I am and more polite than I would have been

things are heating up in the climate denial fandom

Arguing with pigs or playing chess with pigeons comes to mind.

I think you are talking past each other. The charitable interpretation of Robson's statement is this: he isn't talking about the upward trend at the end of every year (winter), but he was saying that the recent years are at a higher level than older years at the same time of year. I cannot make out the truth of that from the video as I can't confidently match the line color to the key colors.

What happened to the whistle blower from Boeing 😮

makes you wonder how many other times he's been corrected and just blocks those so he viewers have no chance to see

"Glaciologists are intimidated by aggressive zealots and their troll followers."-I'm sure they're up there in the the Antarctic, quaking in their frozen boots.

One thing is absolutely spot on; "when [someone] can't get [their] mind around it because it conflicts with what [they] initially thought, [they] are no use to anyone looking for an intelligent discussion and should take [their] irritatingly repetitive conceited erroneous views somewhere else."

He's American, you can't expect him to be able to make a video and have the ability to read the world's most basic graph even a child couldn't fuck up

CDN certainly seemed to be projecting his own inadequacies onto you there. "Rude but dim" uhuh, oh do go on CDN.

Maybe he should use the "crowder defense" and just loudly (and incorrectly) assert that you're scared to debate him before quickly moving on like nothing ever happened.

Your comments were long, repetitive and right. The dyk measuring part was unnecessary. Could shorten the comments for this new era.

You had me until you claimed the things you showed at the end were threats.

Only the upper right post of those is a threat.

A threat is you telling someone else you can and will do something to them.

A threat is not you telling someone you hope something happens to them or think it should or will or blusteringly pretending you will while admitting you don't even know how.

There's a reason we - by which I mean functional people - make fun of people on Twatter who pretend they get death threats all the time because someone called them a mean word or criticized a bad product that they shouldn't buy and then turn around and send actual death threats to those people or send others to send death threats to those people.

If anyone but the top right post claims to have been threatened they deserve nothing but being laughed at.