Talk:Climate change: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 456: :::::: TS - Your last paragraph is exactly why the alarmist are losing the debate now. Manipulation of the peer review process by pro-AGW elements actually discredits all the editing that has been done by your gatekeepers over the years. Now you have reached the point where you can't even see what's happening right in front of (and all around) you. AGW has gone from polar bears dying, sea levels rising and catastrophic warming before the end of the decade (2010)… ..to debating the meaning of "statistically-significant" to maintain their argument. Look how far you have fallen... Mk [[Special:Contributions/71.228.77.211|71.228.77.211]] ([[User talk:71.228.77.211|talk]]) 05:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC) :(outdent) Cute. See [[Talk:Global warming/FAQ|FAQ 19]]. Maybe we should invite real alarmists here so that we'd have a fair debate with equally poor and polarized sources, that or write a decent encyclopedia. [[User:ChyranandChloe|ChyranandChloe]] ([[User talk:ChyranandChloe|talk]]) 07:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC) == Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels == | |||