Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Dollar Free Predictions
- Four Years Past The Deadline
- Cooling Minnesota
- UK Net Zero
- Erasing 1921
- “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- Warming Toledo
- One Year Left To Save The Planet
- Cold Hurricanes
- Plant Food
- President Trump Gets Every Question Right
- The Inflation Reduction Act
- Saving The Ecosystem
- Two Weeks Past The End Of The World
- Desperate State Of The Cryosphere
- “most secure in American history”
- “Trump moves to hobble major US climate change study”
- April 11, 1965 Tornado Outbreak
- The CO2 Endangerment Finding
- Climate Correlation
- What Me Worry?
- Heatwaves Of 1980
- More Proof Of Global Warming
- Shutting Down The Climate
- ChatGPT Research Proposal
Recent Comments
- william on One Year Left To Save The Planet
- Bob G on UK Net Zero
- arn on One Year Left To Save The Planet
- conrad ziefle on One Year Left To Save The Planet
- Ulric Lyons on Erasing 1921
- gordon vigurs on “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- gordon vigurs on Plant Food
- gordon vigurs on Plant Food
- gordon vigurs on “the world’s most eminent climate scientists”
- arn on UK Net Zero
I have read about this gem before and it brings a smile to my face every time. There are some who do not take kindly to being shown the extent of the consensus.
More of the usual dirty play.
there’s lies. there’s damn lies. then there’s statistics.
Someone remind these fools that the “consensus” used to be that the Sun revolved around the Earth, and remind them of what Einstein said about it taking only one experiment to prove a million others wrong. Now *he* was worth listening to.
2500 alarmed scientists standing on the wall.
If one alarmed scientist……..
…………….
75 alarmed scientists standing on the wall.
..but but everyone in cancun agreed – “A significant result” Bwahahaha….
BAFFINBOY from the commend string:
“What percentage of these nations agreed that AGW represented a clear and present danger that must be addressed on an urgent basis? Was it 1%? No. Was it 5%? No. Was it 20%? No. Was it 50%? No. Was it 70%? No. Was it 95%? No. Was it 100%. Yes!!!! A significant result. No “massaging” of figures required.”
“There are two kinds of statistics, the kind you look up and the kind you make up.”
– Rex Stout
Figures don’t lie, but liars can figure!
You know………., advertising this stuff takes away much fun when you spring it on a warmista. Sigh, but I guess its good that they know sooner or later.
I always have to laugh when they bring out the number of “scientists” who contributed to the IPCC reports.
A multinational company called Evolve were trying to develop a windfarm up our way last year ( we saw them off fortunately). They openly bragged that 7 of their employees were among the IPCC contributors. I am quite sure they did not allow any commercial allegiances to affect their contributions.