@ademhen assuming something personally bad about others simply because they disagree reflects a closed mind or a lack of intelligence
@caerbannog666 glad to hear James Powell conducted a google search rather dealing with the arguments of world respected scientists in NIPCC
-
-
.
@DanaRohrabacher NIPCC reports don't stand up to scrutiny I found: http://ourchangingclimate.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/the-nipcc-report/ … (link to criticism of 2009 NIPCC)@caerbannog666 -
@BVerheggen how about looking one issue in contention like: CO2 theory wrongly predicted, major jump in tempt over last 16 yrs=theory wrong -
@DanaRohrabacher@BVerheggen Dana-This is not true. C@rahmstorf entry here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/12/the-global-temperature-jigsaw/ … Please now answer my question about NASA -
@mn4az pardon me. Restate question
-
@DanaRohrabacher NP. NASA site references 97% and sources: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus …. My Q is in in picture below.pic.twitter.com/aStvXrnNPt
-
@mn4az gov agencies R run by pros & political appointees. Often they reference sources that R wrong. Congressional hearings often expose it
-
@DanaRohrabacher R U you suggesting NASA/NOAA climate scientists are referencing sources that R wrong? http://globalchange.gov/home.html -
@mn4az yes, they do that at times. Haven’t U ever watched a Congressional hearing?
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
.
@DanaRohrabacher a) world respected scientists or b) NIPCC : you can only choose one!@caerbannog666Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.