The altered data fits the theory. The measured data goes opposite the theory. Night and day difference between those two concepts.
-
-
2 wks ago the predictions of sea level rise were huge and alarmism was tremendous. One week later we find out they are off 7X. Doesn’t that make you question the “settled science”? We would have wasted trillions planning based on models that were off 700%.https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/02/antarctic-greenland-ice-melt-less-bad/ …
-
A necessary requirement for a theory to be considered robust is to accurately predict future events, eg 1919 total eclipse confirming General Relativity. AGW theory has busted *repeatedly* on its predictions.
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.