EAllusion wrote:EAllusion wrote:Out of curiosity Droopy, do you read original scientific papers on climatology outside of those referenced and interpreted by denialist websites? Not that I trust your truth-telling skills, but I'm genuinely curious how far you go. Easy money is on "no."
Still true.
Ever more confirmation that DAGW was never about science at all, but is an ideology driven and maintained by a confluence of politics, political entrepreneurship, and corporate rent seeking.
By the way, how many original scientific papers have you read other than those generated by government/government agency-funded scientists accepting government grant money that is targeted and funneled only to scientists who already accept the DAGW/CAGW hypothesis and are uninterested in whether or not the hypothesis is falsifiable?