[allmendream]

I am a scientist.

I know that if I “used a trick” to “hide the decline” I would be out on my ear.

For whatever reason climate “science” seems to work under a different set of rules.

I know that if I was caught trying to ‘change the peer review process if we have to’ to keep out dissent I would be out on my ear.

For whatever reason climate “science” seems to work under a different set of rules.

Apparently a regular science peer review process would destroy their carefully built up “consensus” by illustrating that there were gaping holes that they couldn’t account for.

Usually in science if a theory cannot account for all the evidence or respond intelligently to peer reviewed scientific challenges - the theory is either changed, modified, or abandoned.

Apparently climate “science” works under a different set of rules.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

I am a scientist. I know that if I “used a trick” to “hide the decline” I would be out on my ear.

I remember how the famous evolution scientist Samuel Holmes dressed monkeys up in suits and photographed them sitting in parlor rooms.

Apparently climate “science” works under a different set of rules.

It borrows some rules from evolution science.