This is stupid. The data sets are publicly available right here:
https://www.nodc.noaa.gov
J
Jack Gibson
11 years ago
Facts are facts, to omit some to make your point is wrong.
J
Jack Gibson
11 years ago
Facts are facts, to omit some to make your point is wrong.
P
pauline young
11 years ago
another disgusting example of the duplicity and deception of some in science
P
pauline young
11 years ago
another disgusting example of the duplicity and deception of some in science
M
Mark Strand
11 years ago
Science demands all of the data!
M
Mark Strand
11 years ago
Science demands all of the data!
T
Thomas Murton
11 years ago
this fraud must not go unchallenged.
T
Thomas Murton
11 years ago
this fraud must not go unchallenged.
J
Jan Braam
11 years ago
science should combat superstition, instead of reinforcing it.
J
Jan Braam
11 years ago
science should combat superstition, instead of reinforcing it.
B
Bill Hough
11 years ago
The fudging of numbers in the name of "ocean acidification," "global warming," or "climate change" is a disgrace to true science which is based on constant research and a willingness to discared theories disproved by evidence. Galileo could relate.
B
Bill Hough
11 years ago
Featured
The fudging of numbers in the name of "ocean acidification," "global warming," or "climate change" is a disgrace to true science which is based on constant research and a willingness to discared theories disproved by evidence. Galileo could relate.
M
mike eustace
11 years ago
Good work Mr. Wallace
M
mike eustace
11 years ago
Good work Mr. Wallace
G
Gerry Morrow
11 years ago
Science should be open and scientists, especially government scientists inputting into public policy should be obliged, as a disciplinary matter, to reveal all their methods and data and any omissions and the reasons for them in published papers
G
Gerry Morrow
11 years ago
Featured
Science should be open and scientists, especially government scientists inputting into public policy should be obliged, as a disciplinary matter, to reveal all their methods and data and any omissions and the reasons for them in published papers
T
Tim McCracken
11 years ago
As usual supposed climate "scientists" selectively show the only the data that support their narrative.
T
Tim McCracken
11 years ago
As usual supposed climate "scientists" selectively show the only the data that support their narrative.
J
James Cook
11 years ago
In general, I would like to see much less secondary research based on climate models that can't accurately be tied to future climate, and are therefore unverifyable.
This is stupid. The data sets are publicly available right here: https://www.nodc.noaa.gov
Facts are facts, to omit some to make your point is wrong.
Facts are facts, to omit some to make your point is wrong.
another disgusting example of the duplicity and deception of some in science
another disgusting example of the duplicity and deception of some in science
Science demands all of the data!
Science demands all of the data!
this fraud must not go unchallenged.
this fraud must not go unchallenged.
science should combat superstition, instead of reinforcing it.
science should combat superstition, instead of reinforcing it.
The fudging of numbers in the name of "ocean acidification," "global warming," or "climate change" is a disgrace to true science which is based on constant research and a willingness to discared theories disproved by evidence. Galileo could relate.
The fudging of numbers in the name of "ocean acidification," "global warming," or "climate change" is a disgrace to true science which is based on constant research and a willingness to discared theories disproved by evidence. Galileo could relate.
Good work Mr. Wallace
Good work Mr. Wallace
Science should be open and scientists, especially government scientists inputting into public policy should be obliged, as a disciplinary matter, to reveal all their methods and data and any omissions and the reasons for them in published papers
Science should be open and scientists, especially government scientists inputting into public policy should be obliged, as a disciplinary matter, to reveal all their methods and data and any omissions and the reasons for them in published papers
As usual supposed climate "scientists" selectively show the only the data that support their narrative.
As usual supposed climate "scientists" selectively show the only the data that support their narrative.
In general, I would like to see much less secondary research based on climate models that can't accurately be tied to future climate, and are therefore unverifyable.