I don't think he's even trying to be funny, although he hasn't been funny for 30 years so it's hard to tell.
He thinks he's making some insightful point about how everything we know about past temperature trends must be wrong if scientists now prefer even more accuracy.
If we can figure out the route Columbus took in 1492 from ships logs written before it was possible to calculate longitude, why would anyone want GPS? Checkmate?
He's saying that scientists can't actually tell the temperature without thermometers and climate science based on other evidence is bullshit.
Because he's an idiot.
I will continue to hammer this point until somebody pries it from my cold, dead hands: the grinding demands of a daily comic strip have driven stronger minds to madness.
Read a recent article about Bill Watterson in the 🇺🇲 Conservative which talks about the constant pressure the cartoonist endured.
"Why should I use GPS when I've got a sextant and a really good pocketwatch?" - Scott Adams on a highway median about to get sideswiped by a semi doing 85 mph, probably.
A couple years ago he was saying climate change is probably real but scientists aren’t persuasive then kept challenging scientists to persuade him while declaring anything they wrote back was unpersuasive. Perfect evolution here.
Scott Adams isn't a person, he's just a business leadership book, a MRA grievance list, and a case of Dunning-Kruger syndrome stacked up in a trenchcoat
What kind of idiot doesn't understand the difference between the best way possible to find data that wasn't recorded at the time and a better way to record that data that scientists would have happily used if it were available from that point in the past?
why do all these fancy la-di-da scientists think there's a big difference between the past, the present, and the future, I'll take my answer off the air
It all depends. If enough people point at him and laugh--or, say, he loses a contract over some foaming-at-the-mouth racism--he backtracks and claims it was "a social experiment."
