Originally Posted by Fish
But I laugh heartily at your notion of how science grants work. It shows how completely ignorant you are on the subject. Research grants are not given in perpetuation regardless of proof or disproof.
Spoken like a person who knows not what they are talking about. Step into the field sometime and see how the real world works, buddy.
As for your diatribes, did you even read them ( we know the answer... )?!
The first is no 'peer review' in the commonly accepted sense - all they did was review the findings for affirmations, conclusions, etc - NOT the data or methods used!
The second makes a completely unsubstantiated claim that the concentration of C02 at that point in Hawaii will reach levels is has not in, quote, "millions of years"...
The last makes just as ridiculous claims that we've basically already killed our oceans pH balance...
Its called bullshit and there's no debating what bullshit is - its bullshit. The freakin' Russians have even called bullshit
All that aside, naturally you've read this
, right? As Climatedepot
New '97% Consensus' study goes belly up: 'This study done by John Cook and others, praised by the President of the U.S., found more scientific publications whose abstracts reject global warming (78) than say humans are primarily to blame for it' (65)