Jacob
What goes around comes around.
So you keep saying. But you are wrong..
Do you really think I'd put myself up for ridicule from pompous ***** who are clueless but who think they know everything because they've read an editorial on Wikipedia or in some other science magazine? That's not how I work. I research the facts and data evidence first and then decide if the data fits the claims. Mann's DIDN'T!
You need to catch up you are years out of date. 'Hockey stick' graph creator Michael Mann cleared of academic misconduct
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/08/michael-mann-cleared-again/244051/https://www.scientificamerican.com/...igators-clear-climate-scientist-michael-mann/Even if Mann was a total fraud it would not have made an iota of difference - the data was compiled from many sources, by many people, and subsequently revised, up-dated, over the intervening 20 years, with the addition of masses of new research into past climates and accumulating evidence of CC itself actually happening. His "errors" wilful or otherwise would have been completely over-ridden, revised, lost without trace.
You really are flogging a dead horse! 99% of world science is not conducting a massive fraud.
Last edited: