Skip to main content

Reply to "More Empirical falsifications of Anthropic Global Warming"

Geoman.

RE: "Woops". I think this is my line Geo. I didn't mean to cause any upset by suggesting that a comment paper shouldn't need a peer review, as I think that this is part of the process of disproving a paper that already enjoys the peer review label. Meaning, the 'comment' is intended to reopen discussion on the 'already reviewed paper'.

But, hey, I'm not a scientist either and I thought we were all here in this forum for discussion!


Lucibee: I profoundly apologise if I caused your indignation. However, I would dearly like to hear the reasons for your disagreement and not someone else's. Take a trip to Climate Audit's forum and ask EliRabbet a question (Eli is there, but is usually cryptic when responding). Simples!

Best regards, suricat.
S
×
×
×
×
×