Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)
- Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
or sign in to load a different list.
Loading...Saving...
Loading...Saving...
I think the reason they fudged the data is that they were given $55 million in grants and di not want to lose that as well as being the main guys consulting the UN IPCC.I think they should be fired and never be allowed to go near anything scientific or any university or young minds.It is simply the worse fraud on humans everywhere,ever.
2wheels88 2 months ago
Delingpole is right to pick Nurse up on this analogy. He is being polite rather than angry. Not non plussed.
Cancer medicine is based on rigorous experimental practise: trials, double-blind placebo groups etc: they can provide an end test of effectiveness. Climate modelling can do NONE of this, and can provide no comparable "proof" of effectiveness. Nurse knows this.
He is trying to portray Delingpole as a "doubter of science", whereas sceptics believe in science, and that AGW is BAD science.
georgeigler 3 months ago