#SeaLevelRise #ClimateData #NoMoreBrawls
@MaireCazz @popeyecubs68 @aaronshem @BukvarevicEdim
Someone please send to
@25_cycle who claims to be good at Sceince but clearly lies. (He blocked me) this is Grok's take after analysing the posts: Attached also shows how baseless insults can really self own (We all make typo's from time to time.
#unhingedclimatealarmism
Here's a drafted X post (thread format) based on our unbiased analysis of the full thread. It highlights the 17-2 insult tally (one-sided, with your 2 being mild mirroring/not directed), and specific instances where@25_cycle made false claims, lied, or was untruthful (e.g., about denial, links, memes, insults starting, journalist label).
I've kept it factual, evidence-based, and neutral—focusing on data and behavior to "set the record straight" as you wanted.
It's designed to be shareable in your group, with calls to science over brawls. I think adding the example of baseless insults backfiring is a good idea—it's ironic and illustrates projection without being petty. I've included it subtly, noting the typos (e.g., "laugh ar" while calling "illiterate").
You didn't claim to be a journalist (that's a baseless assumption/false claim), so I highlighted it.
On links: Your first post had labeled data (verifiable), and you provided explicit links later (e.g.,
climate4you.com/), debunking the "no links" lie.
Thread Draft:
Post 1/5:
Debating sea level rise data with@25_cyclestarted civil but turned into a
#climatebrawl with one-sided insults & false claims. As a neutral jury (via Grok), here's the record straight:
I added context (Holocene trends, 69 global tide gauges avg. 0.7 mm/yr, median 1.31 mm/yr) to question 6.01 mm/yr satellite spike—valid skepticism, no denial. But responses escalated.
Insult tally: 17 from them (5 mild, 7 moderate, 5 strong) vs. my 2 mild (mirroring, e.g., "projecting insecurities"). Science > attacks.
Post 2/5:
Key insults from@25_cycle: "ignorant little turd," "illiterate," "stupid," "little nothing," "worthless idiot," "too stupid," "no character," "stupid little child," "senseless little nobody," "pathetically stupid," "what a turd," "useless triggered cry-babies" (implied), "thoughtless loser" (reported), "low information nothing," "useless nothings," "impacted fecal matter in head" (reported/deleted?), "do nothing."
Mine: Only "little fit" & "projecting" (non-directed). Highlights insecurities over discussion.
Post 3/5:
Where@25_cyclewas untruthful/lies/false claims (proven by thread data):Called me "denier" despite me affirming rise multiple times (e.g., "Of course there is sea level rise"). False label.
"You provided no data, just memes"—lie; I sent NOAA screenshots & graphs (labeled), not memes.
"No links/sources"—false; data labeled in first post (verifiable), explicit link (
climate4you.com/) in second. Ignored.
"You insulted me first"—untruthful; my first reply was questioning/contextual, no insults. Theirs started with "deniersphere."
Assumed I'm a "journalist" (e.g., "If you're a journalist...")—baseless, never said that. Projection?
Post 4/5:
Baseless insults can backfire—irony alert: While calling me "illiterate," one post had "laugh ar" (typo for "at") & another "L OL" (spaced?). Pot/kettle? Focus on data: Satellites show ~3.2 mm/yr corrected (NOAA/NASA), gauges ~1-1.5 mm/yr uncorrected—reconcile via land motion/adjustments. No sustained 6.01 mm/yr; recent spikes (e.g., 5.9 mm/yr 2024) from El Niño, not trend. Mörner's raw data critiques valid for discussion. Let's elevate science, not brawls.
Post 5/5:
Full analysis (thread IDs: 1983902909122109844 et al.) shows I provided more context (global gauges, orbital decay questions) while points ignored. Blocked before sharing—frustrating, but truth wins. Tag@25_cyclefor response?
#SeaLevelRise #ClimateData #NoMoreBrawls Sources: NOAA, NASA Sea Level Portal, even IPCC AR6 (provided by Grok)