I never said Im an expert on climate change, I said I have access to first hand data and I can see it. And yes there is a difference between a 30-year period (I will be 30 next yr) and next week.
What strikes me most is how all the conspiracy theorists try to find flaws in evidence and try to look for evidences against the proclaimed facts. Yet very often they totally disregard the credibility of those very proofs they use to disprove the other ones.
What I mean is, for example, after 9/11 there were many people saying this was all done and planned by the U.S. government etc etc. Then there was one guy and he wanted to prove exactly what I mention above. So he created a fake video where he photoshoped some obviously controlled explosions in some of the buildings. He put it on YT and said this was taken by some tourists and immediately it went viral and these conspiracy therists used it as major evidence of their believes. They absolutely didnt question the credibility of that video itself, even though that guy even on purpose made it very easy to spot that there is something weird about it (all the explosions looked the same, if you zoomed in a lot you could see they are pasted in and were not there originally and you could even find the original video from which this one was made, without the explosions, just horizontally flipped). He later on published an article about this, and until then, so many people used it as fundamental proof of their believes.
So in this case, you are saying that it is the government that wants us to believe this etc etc., trying to deny global warming. However, do you have any undeniable proof that this is the case?
In scientific terms this is called "confirmation bias", you can look it up.
In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias (or confirmatory bias) is a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions, leading to statistical errors.
