Let's not have annoying facts get in the way of a compelling story I'm not 'against' the Amazon I am, though, against unsubstantiated alarmism Surprising, some people can't tell the differencehttps://twitter.com/GarrettBroad/status/1166134678019026944 …
Dishonest Taken out of context (which is why there is no link: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/oct/14/climatechange-scienceofclimatechange …) Argues we should check our models against data and experience Entirely ignores that I *right before* confirm sea level rise And here earlier from Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jul/14/climatechange …pic.twitter.com/BrfOqOfSsB
-
-
You're from Denmark, you've had the benefit of a higher education and an "easy" life. You should know better than just adding your voice mindlessly to any discourse.
-
Attached some other reading from the Guardian that relates to some of what is currently happening - only not anchored within the supposedly scientific field you always seem to feel safe speaking from. There exists such a thing as real life.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/30/berta-caceres-case-a-warning-shot-for-those-who-would-kill-activists …
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Not at all. In the article, you argue that climate change is - in some respects - better than what has been projected, and you use the last two years decline in sea levels as an example of this, knowing full well that this constitutes merely data noise in the overall trend....
-
... Now THAT is dishonest. You are a cherry-picker of data, paid to lie. The "Copenhagen Concensus" is based in the US and does not represent any scientific concensus, it represents your own concensus, and that of the oil industry.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.