@seanmdav Plus there is no part of the scientific method that includes "consensus."
-
-
-
@TheJeffGoldman@seanmdav [snort] good one -
@TotesDeplorable@seanmdav Thank you! It's funny 'cause it's true. Basic 7th-grade science.
-
-
-
@seanmdav Actually it requires you to reject AGW hypothesis as a whole. -
@krazyvz@seanmdav Seems to make the most sense if the models don't work. If it doesn't work, it's not science.@ChelseaClinton
-
-
@seanmdav And FFS, why does anyone listen to the idiot child of an ex-President and a non-ex-President? -
@seanmdav@ChelseaClinton, what happens in the scientific method when data contradicts your testable predictions?https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-climate-reality/ … -
-
@seanmdav The huge gap between Chelsea's live brain cells causes her to make statements like this, to an audience with *actual* scientists - 1 réponse de plus
-
-
@seanmdav I wonder if her parent's pal Al Gore used it when he predicted we'd reach doomsday...last year -
@seanmdav Chelsea needs to go into hiding like her poor poor Mum.
-
@seanmdav She clearly doesn't understand the scientific method. -
@seanmdav the models have actually been good. Modeling requires you to refine your models to improve them, not reject them wholesale -
@seanmdav Yup. The margin of error is insane in climate science -
@seanmdav Unemployed Stanford grad questions climate experts. -
@seanmdav@GlomarResponder FFS, these fools who think models spit out facts. Models spit out data that are input into other models, repeat.
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.