3 ms·
He's throwing around broad claims (wikipedia is wrong, climate research is wrong) and making ad hominem attacks without providing a factual point of his own. I
by moe 16y ago
He's throwing around broad claims (wikipedia is wrong, climate research is wrong) and making ad hominem attacks without providing a factual point of his own.
I don't claim to understand the science in depth. But neither do I see why I should take his word over what appears to be the current consensus in scientific climate research.
- nika 16y agoSince you seem to be online, let me walk you thru an example. What do you believe is the "current consensus in scientific climate research" on whether glaciers are shrinking or growing? On the balance, are they receding?
- nika 16y agoYou are the one calling him names, and you are the one engaging in ad hominem, and you are not even being honest about what he said. (eg: he never said "climate research is wrong") In fact, you jumped in here, depsite knowing nothing about the science, and have made quite an ass out of yourself. But of course, the reasonable people who have been patient with your are down voted and you are upvoted. Because you support global warming. This site is a hive mind, full of unthinking idiots and thus not worth wasting time on.