I am one of the users leaving Duolingo. I am not leaving over AI. When I complained about things I did not like in the app I did not get any reply, zero, nothing. So I am moving on to Babel. I am already finding Babel better at educating me in a foreign language. You need to use Babel for about a week before you realize it is a better product. I will admit Duolingo has a large draw for children however Babel is better if you want to learn a language. If you want to have fun go with Duolingo.

My last Windows will be 10 since 100% of everything I need runs on Linux. I am advising everyone using Windows 10 to move to Linux which is the path I am taking. If I absolutely must run Windows 11 for something I will run it in a VM sandbox to keep my privacy or not at all.

You would be correct, I did not read the actual scientific paper. I did not intend for suggested assumptions to be taken literally. Those are just there to show how easy it is to steer a paper in whatever direction a person or team would want. Everyone will read a paper and just assume all of the assumptions were made correctly. From the paper, "All uncertainty estimates provided in this study correspond to 90% confidence intervals." I would want to know what are those unreferenced assumptions? Are they really valid? And who funded the research that made them 90% confident? Was it independent research so money did not influence the outcome. I am questioning the way science is influenced by big money. My point is still valid, the assumptions define the results! And I can add big money drives the assumptions or no more research grants.

Thank you for the response. I see that as a problem too since they would have to make assumptions which as always would control the results. For example how many satellites are taking measurements with the assumption being the places where we are not measuring are the same as where we are measuring. This assumption may not be true. For arguments sake we could accept this as scientific fact seems dangerous. we could say it is true and then we have the same problem measuring what is reflected back to the satellite making another set of assumptions. And when was the last time any of these satellites were calibrated and the list goes on. I admit some of this is beyond my area of expertise I just think it is funny that anyone thinks they could measure this with such accuracy. The article even alludes to uncertainty using phrase like "it seems to be", "unlikely to be the cause", "might have just been" and "it suggests". There are probably more. Other questions, has the aging of the satellite instruments caused some of the shift, higher or lower? Did they account for the less particulate matter in the air from reduced pollution from large ships burning cleaner diesel fuel, etc. There are just to many variables and assumptions for us to measure with certainty in my opinion. When they publish these articles they should included which assumptions were made. The assumptions define the results!

Am I the only one here that believes it is impossible to measure "... the amount of energy the Earth receives from the Sun and how much energy it radiates back into space...." Think about it, how do they measure it, they would have to make some assumptions which as always would control the results.

Just tell me how the global temperature is measured? Is it the average of every square mile, every square 1,000 miles, 10,000 miles? What is it exactly?

From the Brave Browser AI search, Does YouTube censor videos? Based on the provided search results, YouTube censorship is a multifaceted phenomenon. Here are some key findings: Auto-ban software: YouTube uses automated systems to remove content, including videos mentioning COVID-19, even if they provide accurate information and do not violate community guidelines (Quora, Dec 10, 2021). Country-specific blocking: Censorship occurs in various countries, including the removal of content critical of governments, religious leaders, or national security-related topics (June 14, 2024). Restricted Mode: YouTube’s feature intended to filter out inappropriate content for children and schools has mistakenly removed LGBT+ content, including videos from creators like Tegan and Sara and NeonFiona (March 21, 2017). Contextual understanding issues: The system sometimes misinterprets video content, leading to wrongful blocking (March 21, 2017). Censorship for monetization: Creators may self-censor to avoid demonetization, which can impact their income (Reddit, October 19, 2023). Political bias: Independent left-wing outlets have reported serial removal and suppression of their content, allegedly due to overzealous or automated moderation (June 17, 2022). In conclusion, YouTube censorship is a complex issue, involving both automated and human-driven decisions. While the platform aims to remove harmful or inappropriate content, it also appears to have issues with contextual understanding, political bias, and country-specific restrictions. This can lead to the removal of legitimate content, including videos that do not violate community guidelines.

It is not possible with our current scientific knowledge to measure and know the global temperature. Please just tell me how the global temperature is measured? Is it the average of every square mile, every square 1,000 miles, 10,000 miles? What is it exactly?

We are done, all you have are insults, lies about me, name calling and nothing of substance.

Okay, let's just start with your first point. Since you believe science can measure global temperature then please explain how it is measured.

You are assuming Youtube isn't censoring his videos.

Why is the video incorrect? Please focus on his argument. And name calling only reduces the validity of your argument.

Why is the video incorrect?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Yupe, I know, however they are very even balanced on most other topics.