“Global warming” stopped 16 years ago

Click the graphic to read more:

How many data points used to justify the global warming scam were UKAS-accredited?

Were any?  Do research scientists have to bother with accreditation?

What is the value of super-precise measurements when fed into speculative computer models?

What was the uncertainty of measurement for each lab that made the measurements?

Did all labs contribute measurements for each point in time or were some edited out?

Had measurements been accredited, would it have spared taxpayers from this expensive deception designed to monetise fear?

If not, does obsessive measurement have value apart from the political dogma that uses it?

Banksters, scientists and politicians excepted

This entry was posted in Bureaucracy, Economics, Politics, Practical problems, Questions, Science and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s