When he presented his misleading graph, when he said 97 % of climate scientists agree, (knowing full well the actual situation that the number is bogus and misleading,) when he mentions adjustments to satellite data but not to surface temperatures with major past cooling and absurd derived precision to.005 * C, when he defends precision in surface global averages but ignores major estimates of temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibil
When he presented his misleading graph,
when he said 97 % of climate scientists agree, (knowing full well the actual situation that the number is bogus and misleading,) when he mentions adjustments to satellite data but not to surface temperatures with major past cooling and absurd derived precision to.005 * C, when he defends precision in surface global averages but ignores major estimates of temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibil
when he said 97 % of climate scientists agree, (knowing full well the actual situation that the number is bogus and misleading,)
when he mentions adjustments to satellite data but not to surface temperatures with major past cooling and absurd derived precision to.005 * C, when he defends precision in surface global averages but ignores major estimates of temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibil
when he mentions adjustments to satellite data but not to surface temperatures with major past cooling and absurd derived precision to.005 * C,
when he defends precision in surface global averages but ignores major estimates of temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibil
when he defends precision in surface
global averages but ignores major estimates of
temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibility.