|
|
|
Most climate scientists
that appear on news programs, or who write op-eds for the various news
outlets, all say the same thing. This scandal might cast more than a
decade of work done by the Climate Research Unit at the University of
East Anglia into doubt, but it doesn’t invalidate research done by
other scientists which support the idea that this planet is warming due
to human action.
Well, gee, why in the world doesn’t it invalidate their work as well?
Didn’t the CRU boast the largest and most comprehensive collection of
climate data in the entire world? Didn’t this massive collection of
data inspire, if not directly influence, just about every other climate
scientist’s work? Aren’t the people who authored the Emails which prove
dirty tricks, data manipulation, and collusion to hide problems with
their research the most prestigious and influential climate scientists
in the world?
So why in the world should anyone take any climate scientist’s word for
their integrity, and soundness of their work? Isn’t the onus on them to
prove that they aren’t crooks and liars, like the big guys were? - Riddle Me This
|
” |
|
