A bit of a follow up to the earlier post on the Earth becoming utterly unable to sustain life, we find
(Esquire)Â But for every doomsday scenario, there’s a more measured take. Climatologist Michael Mann, who said he was interviewed but not quoted for the New York story, shared why he disagreed with some of its points:
Not a big fan of the doomist framing of new @NYMag article ("The Uninhabitable Earth"). My take on it: https://t.co/MYt6ijQ8X1 pic.twitter.com/Eo3Qwe1NDY
— Prof Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) July 10, 2017
(Facebook post is here)
In all fairness, Mann has been a charlatan, relied upon shoddy and manufacture evidence, but, he hasn’t usually be a big fear-mongerer. Say, a 4 on a scale of 10. That article in question is a 10.
They’re all still wrong, but, that’s besides the point for the sake of this post.
Mann is still a fraud and in contempt of court for not producing his data as ordered by the judge in his lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball…
TEACH typed:
Prove it, charlatan!
Fool.
Sorry, I missed one of TEACHs errors in the last comment. Is English his first language? Has he SHOWN his long-form birth certificate?
TEACH typed:
Prove it, charlatan!