Quote:
Originally Posted by brasil
I know I should not bother responding to this....
1.Your graphs are not wrong....
|
First sentence is true. And the denial following it was certainly predictable.
But your point about the graphs...gotta disagree. You give these geniuses and their naive, gaslighting arguments too much credit.
The graph is a piece of shit.
First, the "timeline" shown on the bottom is not linear, i.e. the space given to the "Icehouse" period of 3.64 million years is roughly the same amount of physical space given to the "Ordovician" period of 73 million years. That is just plain bad scientific technique. It distorts the timeline physically and makes the "Icehouse" time period look longer than it really is.
It is completely misleading and shows data out of context that proves nothing. But hey...it sure looks
kewl, right?
The second problem is where this turd comes from. The "CO2 Coalition" a garbage, junk science site that even the Marshall Institute ended up disavowing. The CEO is a former CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, which gave them much of their funding. No biases or influences there, though, I'm sure.
In their "analysis" of the graph, the site uses simplistic language and misrepresentation to take advantage of how little the general public knows about climate....and hard science in general. Despicable. But all too common these days.
Plain and simple, this is not a peer reviewed, vetted article.
If you submitted this in your High School Earth Science class, you would probably get a "D" grade.
You boyz been suckered again. But yer dug in so far now that there ain't no fuggin way yer gonna admit it.
It's getting really old.
And boring.
.