Another moron who tries to dismiss skeptics as “funded by big oil” and pooh-poohs the rampant fraud in the data as “a few mistakes” by a “few researchers” while there is still a “mountain of evidence” for warming.
Is Friedman dishonest or just ignorant ? The “mountain” of warming data all uses the faulty foundation of temperature data provided by just four sources in the entire world. We now know thanks to the ClimateGate whistleblower that at least two of those four sources had their data deliberately tampered with by computer programs that bumped temperatures upward over time. This means that literally HALF of all the data — and ALL of the ground-temperature data — that all those “thousands” of other researchers used was fraudulent.
We have leading MGW scientists who claimed just last year that 2000-2009 was the warmest decade in centuries now admitting that there has been no warming since 1995 and there has actually been cooling since 2002. We have the IPCC admitting that they included wild claims about glacier melting and Amazon deforestation and African crop yields — claims they knew were ridiculous but included for “political impact”.
What will it take to break through the Warmists’ brainwashing ?
It's all fruit from the same poison tree. All I'd dispute is your "HALF" claim. The more we read, the more it seems it's all the same. Whether it's temperature records, or some lame proxy, it's nearly all corrupted and skewed to produce the desired outcome by alarmists.
Those are not mutually exclusive possibilities.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't use reason to get into.
For far too many, "saving the erf" is their only way to "matter" in this world. It won't be easy. Probably the best way would be to give them another way to "matter".
The New York Times won a Pulitzer Prize for denying the ills of Sovet Russia.
Same old same old song and dance at the NYet Times, comrade.