Paging @DanaRohrabacher. Paging @DanaRohrabacher. Skeptical Science consensus paper voted ERL's best article of 2013 http://skepticalscience.com/SkS-consensus-paper-ERL-best-article-2013.html#.U1YRtdYsOa4.twitter …
@mn4az baloney. started out 97o/o of scientists now papers. Motive in heralding such nonsense is stifling debate, like yelling “Case Closed”
-
-
@DanaRohrabacher Not baloney... Data doesn't lie. U ducked my question. Where's your source? Provide it please. -
@mn4az U claim 97o/o of all scientists correct?was Russian Academy of Science, who oppose AGW theory, included? How all scientists contacted
-
@DanaRohrabacher Wow. Saw a video which u said that via a verbal conversaion w/ Russia. Signed statement differs. http://www.nationalacademies.org/includes/G8+5energy-climate09.pdf … -
@mn4az I spoke directly to top scientists of Russian Academy in Moscow on several occasions. i didn’t get that through filter U use
-
@DanaRohrabacher But what they have signed directly contridicts what you say. -
@DanaRohrabacher That comment also puts u directly odds with the USGCRP. Don't know about u but I will trust USGCRP any day over Russia. -
@mn4az point is 97o/o figure supposedly included all scientists. large number of Russians obviously left out, as many more: number bogus
-
@DanaRohrabacher (1/2) Resarch paper shows Russians included. - 4 more replies
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.