Or you could make some childish personal attack to deflect an argument from a 1973 Nobel price winner based on his age because you clearly don't understand what he's talking about. Sad!
He basically deflects himself, fully admitting his lack of expertise at the beginning of the presentation (perhaps you didn't even watch your own propaganda).
No doubt you have no idea that there were two other nobel laureates at that same meeting giving talks with the opposite message on global heating.
He basically deflects himself, fully admitting his lack of expertise
He's being honest to the audience, it doesn't make him less competent in science.
there were two other nobel laureates at that same meeting giving talks with the opposite message on global heating.
Opposite message that has been proven wrong, because the earth is not warming as they claimed it was. It is all a sham, and you're addicted to it.
Opposite message that has been proven wrong, because the earth is not warming as they claimed it was. It is all a sham, and you're addicted to it.
Liar. Are you so stupid you can't read a graph?
(post is archived)