"97% of scientific consensus" google it... She has stated that...

First 91 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Bookface

31 Posts.

02/03/18

10:25

Post #: 31473331
Share

Originally posted by mjp2 ↑

JC is not part of the 97% consensus on anthropomorphic climate change to my knowledsge. I've not ever seen that suggested.

The paper author self selection came in at 96% consensus. So if JC is part of the 97% it's because she said she was! Or is part of the 1% difference between those two of the several approaches to surveying consensus.

So I am not seeing anything to trigger my BS meter.

Curry has her views. She thinks she is hard done by because no one in the climate science academic community believes her or wants to fund her work. Well sometimes that happens when you start saying dumb things.
imho, from reading her work and watching several videos of her, the quotes you have given are symptomatic of a bitter academic who's work is not passing muster.

Again, if you have found any of her actual science work that you believe does hold muster, and provides evidence to rebut anthropomorphic global climate change, contrary to the views of other climate science experts, I am happy to be pointed in that direction. I've not seen any of her work that justifies her view that she is right and nearly everybody else in climate science is wrong.

Expand

"97% of scientific consensus" google it...

She has stated that she is part of the 97% because of the way the questions are framed. So,if true....... what do you think of that?

Please, humour me for just a minute....., it's not much of a stretch to say she may be telling the truth about the 97% Would that not give you cause for concern, that the (former) leader of the free world is full of BS for purpose of deluding the masses? While the world peers into the microscope, what was the (former) leader of the free world up to?

.
Upvote

Reply