What percentage of these wise and sage signee’s are climatologists?
That is a good question. I suspect a good many are astrologers and alchemists.
What “Scientists”? There is more good solid science in Scientology than there is in anthropogenic global “climate change”.
Computer models are NOT science, and at best any model constructed must necessarily leave out a number of the important parameters, mostly because we do not know what those parameters are. Then there is the much more obvious tactic of not including some very important parameters that are known to exist, but are simply ignored.
Faith and faith alone is not enough. The very essence of REAL scientific inquiry is continuous questioning of even some generally accepted observations, and how alternate explanations (theories) may be advanced to accommodate new observed data.
What percentage of these wise and sage signee’s are getting federal grants to ‘study’ the climate?
I need a federal grant to study the climate in Tahiti, Samoa, Hawaii and Australia...................It’ll take a loong time.........
I’d just like these so-called scientists to describe just a single experiment that would prove this theory. We’d be able to review it, to test it and then to repeat the tests (the scientific method). But they have rejected real science proof in exchange for models that generate grants.