Oh, sorry, the disclaimer was copied from the Youtube page. I thought substack was following the lead of putting blurbs like that. I watched the video embedded in the article. Very ironic since anyone with a modicum of brain capacity would realize that the video succinctly disproves the blurb or at the very least makes it extremely uncertain and unlikely.
I can remember in the 1990's watching a documentary that had Dr. Henrik Svensmark giving a presentation to a large audience of scientists showing his new found correlation between solar cycles and global temperatures.
After the presentation was over, or it may have even been before he was done, the crowd of scientists were having none of his proposal of the correlation and began berating him to the point that many resorted to yelling.
A telling moment indeed. The reaction to "climate science" dogma questioners is remarkably similar, it seems, to the onslaught that dogma questioners for other such things as mRNA vaccines receive.
Yup.
About 4 years ago I gave a Seminar at I.U. Bloomington regarding my analysis of the Vostock Ice Core DATA and questioning the AGW Narrative.
At the end of my talk, the Department Chairman said, "You rely too much on DATA".
What's up with the moronic UN blurb about at the end of the article? I thought Substack was neutral?
Read my whole article --
I used that blurb as a quintessential example of the Censorship and Propaganda we are inundated with.
Oh, sorry, the disclaimer was copied from the Youtube page. I thought substack was following the lead of putting blurbs like that. I watched the video embedded in the article. Very ironic since anyone with a modicum of brain capacity would realize that the video succinctly disproves the blurb or at the very least makes it extremely uncertain and unlikely.
Thanks for posting this. I am a bit sceptical tho:
1) I doubt can you measure surface temperatures from 8000 years ago
2) Surface temperature of 30 -32 C in Greenland I find hard to believe.
Thanks for you comment Mr. Small.
I think your comment might strike a chord with many others.
Consequently I will address your comment in a new Post.
It's minus 30-32.
Yup --
Here's a tip kids (learned this in Physics graduate school):
Whenever uncertain, use the minus sign, not the positive sign.
Why? Simple: It's easier to change a minus sign into a positive sign than a positive sign into a negative sign!
I can remember in the 1990's watching a documentary that had Dr. Henrik Svensmark giving a presentation to a large audience of scientists showing his new found correlation between solar cycles and global temperatures.
After the presentation was over, or it may have even been before he was done, the crowd of scientists were having none of his proposal of the correlation and began berating him to the point that many resorted to yelling.
A telling moment indeed. The reaction to "climate science" dogma questioners is remarkably similar, it seems, to the onslaught that dogma questioners for other such things as mRNA vaccines receive.