Cash vs Climatology

Please remember here that the focus of our attention is not how much money's being piled up, but rather how much noise the various advocates are making. One key point is that the AGW advocates are saying "97% of the scientific papers agree to AGW". You're saying that scientific paper money is small change. That's irrelevant because it's STILL a scientific paper and it's NOISE.

Contrast what we hear from the establishment scientific industry (who may not be making any MONEY) versus what you and I can actually observe using the scientific method of inquiry. While all the AGW folks are pointing to what the science industry SAYS, none of them care to simply LOOK at the validity of the claims.

OK, that's my experience, but it'd be great if u could prove me wrong. By any chance would YOU be willing to work w/ me on this? Personally I really would be grateful if u and I could check this out together here and now.

 

Hmm... It's like you entirely ignored all of the scandal, and dishonesty that went into how climate orthodoxy came to be in the first place. To put it bluntly, absent real dishonesty, AGW wouldn't exist. Absent active destruction of the climate history data set, AGW wouldn't exist.

Golly, you might say that without the corruption of AGW faithful, well, it just wouldn't exist, and that $650B of government funding has just "nothing" to do with it... LMAO.. Y'all got jokes..

 

So it's an exercise in projection from a corrupt cult whackaloon. And that's all you have.

You regularly push weepy conspiracy theories from authoritarian political cranks, and you didn't disappoint here.

So, how are things going outside of your cult bubble? Made any progress in the world of science?

No?

Well, keep trying. If you just _believe_ hard enough, maybe your weird cult pseudoscience will magically become true.

 

No. More accurately, that's just another baseless fabrication on your part, and it's all you have.

<yawn> The fact that historical temperature data have been retroactively altered to conform to the CO2-centered climate narrative is not a theory. It is a plain fact. And acolytes of the anti-fossil-fuel cult are the very last people on earth who can accuse anyone else of authoritarianism, a fact regularly proved here in this forum, not least by your "contributions."

Lots. So much so that the CO2-centered climate narrative is effectively dead as an intellectual force. It survives only on dishonesty, political power, inertia, dishonesty, herd instinct, logical fallacies, and dishonesty.

Yes. See the WCD referenced in these threads. Hundreds of the world's most respected scientists have stated that your doomsday cult beliefs are objectively false. That's the problem with pushing an anti-science agenda: the facts of objective physical reality are coming for you.

But, keep trying. If you just _believe_ hard enough, maybe your weird cult pseudoscience will magically become true.

 

You poor thing you who keep pushing unfounded unsupported attacks on people and organizations week in and week out it is old and worn-out silliness which is all you are capable of posting.

Climate realists are actually smashing warmist/alarmists week in and week out because they are ready to debate to topic and its details while the warmist/alarmists cult spend a lot of time producing fallacious consensus and dishonest arguments with personal attacks thrown in it.

Case in point is this thread I have posted in several forums where warmists/alarmists behave the same everywhere show their abject terror of the CONTENTS of the article by ignoring it to throw their irrational immature fallacies and attacks against the source and author.

Where Is The “Climate Emergency”?

LINK

 

<yawn> As per your habit, that is nothing but ad hominem filth devoid of factual or logical content.