If the underlying data was falsified (or omitted opposing data), and if the computer models are shown to have used bad code, how can we believe the conclusions of the studies?
Great points made in the comments section of the video:
Did Gibbs actually say that "there is no real scientific basis for the dispute of climate change?"
==================
Hmmmm, let see. . .
PERHAPS THERE IS NO DISPUTE FOR A NUMBER OR REASONS.
~ Is it because it had to be re-named Climate Change from Global Warming, because to hide the pesky little reality that there is no warming?
~ Is it because the funding is pulled from any scientist or project that doesn't have findings that agree with the theory of "man made climate change"?
~ Is it because Al Gore refuses to debate Global Warming or the findings in his award-winning movie. And if some one does question him, they are forcibly removed from the room?
~Is it because the many that are directly involved in creating the "climate change" regulations stand to greatly benefit financially when they are implemented and don't want it disputed?
~ Is it because the mainstream media will not discuss the "ClimateGate" emails have surfaced that clearly show that the data has been manipulated to fulfill a political agenda?
~ Is it because if this hoax does not go through will be biggest source of potential tax revenue that the US Government has implemented on it's citizen's since the income tax?
~ Is it because the many other Nation's have stood up and said they do not find any validity in the findings and question the data and results are branded as "cynical" and "uncooperative"?
~Is it because the promoters of "global warming/climate change" will not let their findings be subjected to peer reviews?
~ Or is it simply because Mr. Gibb's does not have a clue to what he is talking about?
Again, I am reminded of Piltdown Man. Hopefully MMGW won't take 40 years to be exposed.
