Is this the same scientific community that so often claims that race does not exist?https://twitter.com/JulianInsange/status/1095043349189292032 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
When your argument fails you always just change the subject
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
Consensus never settled anything.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Current “scientific” “climate change” model: Start by identifying the results you want to achieve, then only use the controls and mathematical inputs that will produce the desired results, then tweak you projection model to exaggerate your already biased and faulty assumption.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@StefanMolyneux apparently doesn't understand that 'race' is an entirely useful term, which is used to further subdivide many animal species, and sociologically (if not biologically) can even be useful when talking about human beings. Can he simply not read, or won't he? -
Either you mistyped or misunderstood Molyneux is using the example of race denial to delegitimize appeal to the scientific community.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
-
Bogus, disingenuous science marketing. "Most papers (66 per cent) actually took no position. Of the remaining 34 per cent, 33 per cent supported at least a weak human contribution to global warming. So divide 33 by 34 and you get 97%" https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/putting-con-consensus-not-only-there-no-97-cent-consensus-among-climate-scientists-many …
-
I realize you don't want global warming to be real, I don't want it to be true either, but when the scientists in that field tell you it's happening, get a clue. Even if you split the 66% 50/50 (not how it works but OK), you still get 66% saying it's happening.
-
No, you get 64 total scientists "marked" as saying we cause most warming & only 41 actually saying we do... out of 11,000+ abstracts reviewed. The vast majority say that we cause "some" warming and those are we who you alarmists call "skeptics." There are a greater number of us.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Well, everyone reading the consensus papers with a scientific background can see the consensus is at best exaggerated.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think you misunderstand scientific disciplines Stefan. Those who study climate are unlikely to also study race. It's rather like thinking a baker can tune a Chevy
- 1 more reply
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.