So you would agree the site you linked to is more scientific and empirical? The owner of metabunk.org, Mick, is thoroughly defeated in a public debate by Dane W

So you would agree the site you linked to is more scientific and empirical? The owner of metabunk.org, Mick, is thoroughly defeated in a public debate by Dane Wingington, who you apparently detest, here: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wigington-west-geoengineering-debate.2211/ https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wigington-west-geoengineeri... Mark my words, this issue is going to become more mainstream over the next thirty years. Your position is simply anti-science. > Dane: You know, that's a great suggestion! I appreciate that suggestion, we'll do that, not just here, because we're already arranging meters for Norway, Maine, New Mexico, and Florida. So we'll do that in each location. And you know one that makes it quite clear that the numbers are that bad Mick, and again, your suggestion is a good one and we will follow that up. The bark in the pacific Northwest is literally being fried off the trees. Completely fried off to the core wood. Trees are dying everywhere up here. It takes a tremendous amount of UV to do that. Nothing grows here, which is a known consequence of excessive UV. I mean the UV seems so staggeringly high that leaves are literally falling off the trees right now. They started falling off in July. So, we see every single sign of excessive UV. Massive insect decline. We just had a US forest service biologist re-survey the terrestrial insects - 90% decline. Bark being burned off the trees. You can't stand in the sun here. So we believe those numbers. We are actually trying to use conservative math, because if you take the UVA and if you calculate 5% of the UVA measured in milliwatts per centimeter squared, you would come out with 3.5, and if you divide that into ten, which is UVB you'd get a number that's close to 3000%.