Climate scientists are very resourceful, using their old global cooling diagrams to explain global warming.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Bullseye!
- It’s Getting Closer
- Greenland Meltdown Scam
- Greenland Ice Update
- Wyoming Gold
- Three Years Since The Apocalypse
- Arctic Report card Summer 2026
- Elon Pushing Pushing Geoengineering
- Earth, Wind And Fire
- On The Road Again
- Vandalism At The Reflecting Pool
- Fifty Years Ago Today
- Truth Or Consequences
- US Climate Trend Maps
- Declining Spring Snow Cover In Northern New Mexico
- You Can’t Fool Mother Nature
- Cattle And The Climate
- One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- New Video : Analyzing Oil And Gas
- Is Antarctica Melting?
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Bullseye!
- conrad ziefle on Bullseye!
- arn on Greenland Ice Update
- D. Boss on Bullseye!
- D. Boss on Bullseye!
- scott allen on Bullseye!
- scott allen on Bullseye!
- John Francis on Greenland Ice Update
- Bob G on Bullseye!
- D. Boss on Bullseye!
I could believe that 82 authors, even if they all had science degrees, could be wrong about something, BUT when they come from 13 different countries ( not 13 from the same countries), well how could they be wrong?
The need for funds is universal, especially among the least competent and otherwise unemployable.
How come their wonderful climate models could not predict the polar vortex effects BEFORE anybody noticed the extreme cold? Post hoc rides again. Piecemeal, ad hoc, explanations whenever evidence refutes their duff theory. In real science, a single counter example is all that is needed to refute a theory, and cause a major re-think of the fundamentals. But no, AGW is sacrosanct, holy doctrine, which must never be questioned. So we have this sticking plaster approach more fitting for astrology, palmistry, reading tea leaves and Tarot cards, when their predictions go awry.