In the email, John suggested that the graphic had gained so much popularity, it would likely soon be the target of attacks
from fake skeptics.
But it was just another comment
from a fake skeptic troll.
Not exact matches
(bleach pH 13, do you know what that means) how much of it, is washed into the sea, you don't talk about it; because doesn't suit the propaganda, and because of the
fake Skeptic's ignorance), Mick, do you know how much limestone / calcium, magnesium / salts gets washed
from the hills into the sea every year?!
Dad would come home
from a conference reporting that yet another scientist was fuming about being misrepresented as being a
fake skeptic, when they were nothing of the sort.
[DB] Rather than promulgating
fake -
skeptic graphs
from dubious blogs, use rather the scientific sites, like this one
from NASA:
Cooked and recooked data is exclusively for brainwashing the Warmist
from the lower genera and IQ + ALL of the
fake Skeptics.
Well, say the
fake skeptics, scientists must be conpsiring to obtain such similar results
from independent studies using different methods, tools and data (/ sarc).
It is as nonsensical and unscientific as the other kookie phrase
from fake -
skeptics - «the globe is cooling my friends.»
One reason I am fairly certain the document is
fake is this line
from the supposed
skeptic strategy document:
The fascination of
fake -
skeptics with the troposphere comes
from the current flat (at record high levels) of tropospheric temperatures.
The spectrum of positions held by this fringe element range
from those who deny the existence of the so - called greenhouse effect, to self proclaimed «lukewarmers» and
fake skeptics.
If it's not obvious, that's «The challenge for the genuine
skeptic who can't (or won't) make the effort to become an expert himself, is to achieve scientific meta - literacy adequate to distinguish genuine
from fake climate expertise».