@DanaRohrabacher Your questions at today's Committee hearing show a stunning level of ignorance regarding climate and science in general.
@MFerrara37 That means a large number of people, including GW advocates, know 97% figure is bogus & being used to silence debate
-
-
@DanaRohrabacher The broad consensus of climate scientists is that the climate is changing & human actions play a role in that change.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@DanaRohrabacher 1000s of peer reviewed studies reflect this position. I can direct you to them & a study that supports the 97% figure cited -
@MFerrara37 I have seen the report & know the process used...have you? How many peer review studies inaccurately predicted major tempt jump?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@DanaRohrabacher Your response to my criticism of your position up to now has been to call me names & engage in logical fallacies. -
@MFerrara37 I keep asking 4 you or any strong advocate of GW to explain why failure of predicted jump in temp doesn't discredit CO2 theory -
.
@DanaRohrabacher@MFerrara37 Congressman, here's an explanation from a recent published journal: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.2297/full … -
@cartoon_villain@MFerrara37 Thank you 4 being only person who even tried to explain failure of GW based predictions. At least u tried. -
.
@DanaRohrabacher@MFerrara37 You mean, only person to explain it to you via Twitter. Hundreds of experts have an explanation, Congressman. -
@cartoon_villain@MFerrara37 hundreds U ignore have a different explanation: CO2 miniscule part of atmosphere & has minor temp impact -
.
@DanaRohrabacher@MFerrara37 Please answer yes or no: did you read and understand the article I sent to you? -
@cartoon_villain@sschwarz07@CColose:@DanaRohrabacher is not interested in engaging in actual debate. Lets leave him to his fallacies. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@DanaRohrabacher I appreciate your response & if you want to discuss facts I am happy to continue, otherwise I am wasting my time. -
@MFerrara37 OK have you reviewed the process used to come up with the 97% figure? I have. Even the EPA spokesman wouldn't defend it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.