RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT https://t.co/vja…
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
Boom MFer!
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT https://t.co/vja…
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
RT @KHayhoe: And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
Fox News will continue to amplify the .1%
And the 0.1%? We took a look at those. Turns out every one we looked at had an error. https://t.co/N1pHmOKsPT
@krommenaas @mark_lynas @mboudry This is a study of the 2 % that rejected anthropogenic global warming: https://t.co/LnJqqPZEU2
@blahblah1905 vou até deixar aqui mais um, pra vc se atualizar Artigo que examina estudos contrários ao consenso científico em clima e que chegou à conclusão de que têm muitas falhas: https://t.co/0FiaVB1Zk2
@kjell_bolme @perjoste1 @bjorningeb Jeg er gjerne med i debatt på vitenskapelig premisser. Her er mitt første innlegg: https://t.co/Q23qZWhJ1f Ser frem til svaret.
@Arvidoen @Meteorologene Har du lest denne artikkelen: https://t.co/Q23qZWhJ1f
@JefimVogel It's this one by @RasmusBenestad @dana1981 @STWorg et al... https://t.co/TATl9CjQN1
@AlexandriaV2005 @KHayhoe Found it! https://t.co/Yf16Qw8iao
@AlexandriaV2005 How about discussing how the “other side” has been resoundingly debunked? https://t.co/yDHJyLRrnm
RT @Veritatem2021: Credible science is founded in verifiable evidence, not fashionable belief. There isn't a shred of verifiable cause eff…
RT @Veritatem2021: Credible science is founded in verifiable evidence, not fashionable belief. There isn't a shred of verifiable cause eff…
Credible science is founded in verifiable evidence, not fashionable belief. There isn't a shred of verifiable cause effect evidence for AGW.
What about the papers that disagree with this consensus? Taking a critical look at the 2% of papers that reject anthropogenic global warming reveals a number of methodological flaws, and a pattern of common mistakes emerges https://t.co/3Hm6NusmqC
Learning from mistakes in climate research | SpringerLink https://t.co/OwjFkh8WT1
@SmileNEnjoy2021 @DavidV5Goliath @MrRedMoomin 2. All the data the conspiracist showed was falsified and misinterpreted. The scientific data says otherwise. https://t.co/mTEbBaYIs7 https://t.co/jFZkA1ZVLa https://t.co/8cGyCcMVLD https://t.co/pipAw6TnxB http
@charliehtweets @EcoSenseNow @thegwpfcom https://t.co/kNRDRTO262 https://t.co/PPyLy4RGhR https://t.co/7siub2e7gO https://t.co/eJrT1dXdsM https://t.co/7I5cQPMoVn This is excellent, you may need to subscribe but highlights some usual suspects https://
@charliehtweets @EcoSenseNow @thegwpfcom are full of it@and I have a list on my page (many are insignificant bots) Denier studies debunked https://t.co/uaBwOIAvCA https://t.co/LUO98QEmVC https://t.co/1zg22iV6tW https://t.co/bViwDhZ5cB and https://t.co
@perjoste1 Klimaastroligi er tilbakevist blant annet i: https://t.co/Q23qZWhJ1f
@EcoSenseNow @RedbudHunt @House_Call_Band @twitter @TwitterSupport stop platforming climate change denial and unfounded smear by abhorrent propagandists like @EcoSenseNow List of debunked propaganda https://t.co/26hEdhYkEB Denier studies debunked https:
@Europolitikus @ThomasVerheugen @zac1967 Sehr unwahrscheinlich: https://t.co/dLo1FVIX6t https://t.co/GStBYpVcfh
@drolkrad_ehT @FriendsOScience @icandosocanu @Albion_Inmate @friends_earth Let’s do some more… List of debunked propaganda https://t.co/UTAvAYZwIm https://t.co/1mUBnJC3Iq Denier studies debunked https://t.co/LDcGklAUjw https://t.co/X3fdnwAvhs https:/
Prof Hayhoe made a fleeting reference to this paper ages ago. This is first time , I have seen it. If climate science is an interest, take some time and read it.
@rolandbouman @spbverhagen @TinusPulles @Aquila_Anoniem @klimaatVeranda @GerritHiemstra @groenlinks Er bestaan overigens wel enkele wetenschappelijke publicaties die de antropogene oorzaak ('attributie') aanvechten. Bij zorgvuldige analyse blijken deze st
@akaelwopo1 @tan123 But now that we're discussing validation, this is one of my favourite studies on the subject: Here scientists analysed 38 denialist papers and tried to replicate them. Their conclusion? Well... https://t.co/ecqb1JeIHf https://t.co/evDNJ
@kufikiria @jguimbao @ierrejon Y aquí otro que analiza papers que se encuentran entre los que lo niegan. https://t.co/oWsmeCo7bs