- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 47,695
- Reaction score
- 10,468
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Congratulations. You managed to accuse me of saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I said.
That's the fundamental difference between an honest poster and a dishonest one.
I only read what you posted and determined that this must be the cause of your misunderstanding of the real science that undermines the idea of AGW.
When so many predictions are utterly wrong and wrong by a wide margin, either the natural world is wrong or the people making the predictions are wrong.
If it's the people who are wrong, then they must be trying to fit the data into their conclusion instead of changing the conclusion when the data does not support it.
See where you've made your mistake? The "then" part of the "if-then" is always wrong because your experts are ignoring actual science and using AGW Science. IF they are always wrong, THEN they must be using AGW Science.
By the way, have you located the instrumental record that justifies the AGW Science saying that the Deep Ocean is warming?
