“quite probably”, “may be”, “could have” are not scientific arguments.


The climate “scientist” believes the simulation model is more real than the world. Come on lads, stick your head out of the window a bit more often!

Self-styled consensus climate models are not scientific. Just because people trained in science make the models – does not make models scientific.

The models reflect the tunnel vision of their modellers. In the Obama era, about $32 billion was given in grants to climate scientists over eight years. What do we have to show for it? Only a tiny fraction of the money was spent testing the idea of man-made climate change. The results of those attempted validations is not compelling in support of the idea. These huge grants on offer to “prove man-made climate change” corrupt science.

Scientists should be trying to falsify the idea not prove it!

Rather: scientists who are willing to try falsifying it are labelled “deniers” and their employment is forever at risk of being cancelled by ‘mobs’ of climate activists.

In the author’s opinion: the very best climate modelling work in the last decade came from team Zharkova, who got not one bent penny in grants. They made their model out of curiosity, and derived it from data; yet are treated as pariahs in the so-called ‘community’ of science for daring to contradict government science.