08-07-2019, 07:49 PM
(08-07-2019, 06:41 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Again, I posted about 3 pages explaining the issues. If you've read any of the science, or care to, go google it and refute what was written. I don't keep a running list of studies you wouldn't read and probably wouldn't understand, anyway. Spencer, Curry and some of the others referenced in those links have plenty of published research if you care to read any.
Spencer's Climate Change 101 (one of my links), is entirely accurate and unbiased which, again you could verify (or refute) for yourself with Google, if you cared to.
Just like last time. Crickets and ad-hominem attacks. When I say their models aren't validated (kind of a huge, monumental deal) and that's the basis of Climate alarmism, there's really nothing for me to prove. That statement is either true, or you can go prove it's not true.
1. There wasn't an ad hominem attack in my post.
2. I'm not asking you to prove or disprove anything. I just asked for the journal articles, not editorials. And I did so without questioning your ability to understand them like you did which is an ad hominem attack.
