No I didn’t. If you falsify and ignore data - without proper documentation, you aren’t engaging in science.
Re-read the sentence in italics.
Are the people doing falsification wrt Hadley CRU scientists, or not?
Because you claimed (again, post 143, re-quoted by me in post 170) that
"How can you, with a straight face claim that scientists would ignore data that is presented to them with actual research and data to back it up?"
So I wasn't asking if they were "engaged in science". I asked if they were or weren't *scientists*.
Are you unable to answer a simple question, when it doesn't lead to the strawman / ad hominem you would like it to?
Cheers! Cheers!
“I asked if they were or weren’t *scientists*”
I say no. I don’t know their resumes, but presumably they were at one time, but what they were engaged in at Hadley CRU was not science, and therefore the folks supporting it were not scientists. Maybe they were scientists in their spare time.....
“Are you unable to answer a simple question, when it doesn’t lead to the strawman / ad hominem you would like it to?”
I thought my answer was self-evident. Global warming “research” and “creation science” is not science they are deceptions, and those engaging in it - if their aim is to meet a pre-determined conclusion fitting some external influence - are not scientists.