|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 23, 2017 21:32:44 GMT
As Cinemachinery said, scientific claims are typically peer reviewed. If the study isn't legit or the results are rather scientifically lacking, the claim typically gets rejected by the science community. The Piltdown Man hoax is a good example of this. Too bad the scientific community can't do the same with the manmade global warming hoax You seemed to have missed the point of the OP. If manmade global warming was a result of "gangster science" like you claim, then why is it that the Koch brothers, who wanted manmade global warming disproved, paid for a study to be done by one of the most outspoken climate change skeptic scientists, and even HE came to the conclusion that manmade global warming was real? If you're theory was right, this shouldn't have happened. Here you have a blatant example of a study being paid for to produce a certain result, and the result wasn't obtained, and the result even changed the mind of those doing the study. |
|
