It is no longer prudent for the environmental movement to think of geoengineering as a closeted secret of
quack scientists or something out of an Isaac Asimov novel.
Why do I have to search into the farthest depths of the internet to find any relevant and compelling research on GW and mainstream outlets these days have nothing to say unless
its some quack scientist with a quack theory that they think will bring some ratings?
Not exact matches
In a 2013 article in The Atlantic, pediatrician Paul Offit wrote that although Pauling was «so spectacularly right» that he won two Nobel Prizes, the
scientist's late - career assertions about the benefits of dietary supplements were «so spectacularly wrong that he was arguably the world's greatest
quack.»
But a tipping point has now been reached, with objective
scientists and the public finally rejecting the
quacks who remain possessed by the irrational fears of saturated fat and cholesterol.
The adjacent chart, produced by a non-rocket
scientist, is yet more proof of the
quack climate model «science» that policymakers have been forced to rely on.
My position for many years has been that the climate change scammers don't bother to read and are being led by the nose, and by
quacks masqurading as
scientists, down the road to massive new taxes to solve a problem that does not exist, and that we could not fix if it did.