Aussies tampering climate data numbers

>>135725057
Because they're not scientists. They fired everyone in that bureau with a degree last year. Now it's all admins, paperwork, and hiring minorities.

File: 1498032912639.png (88KB, 611x669px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 611x669px

>mfw shitposting about climate change internationally

File: baseball.jpg (253KB, 1900x1140px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1900x1140px

>>135725550

America does not take a night off

>>135725057
Climate change is very profitable, govt grants, studies upon studies with fraudulent data to justify more spending that will never see any results aside from getting more money to sell product that doesn't exist. I imagine the fuckers are making big bucks off of liberal retards

>>135727335

All the "green" companies that were started up rely on climate change (whether real or imagined), so more data that points to it, the more profits they make.

File: WOCC.jpg (43KB, 500x331px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x331px

Did you know that the “97% of all scientists believe in global warming” (((study))) was also an IRL Australian shitpost?

>Surely the most suspicious “97 percent” study was conducted in 2013 by Australian scientist John Cook — author of the 2011 book ‘Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand’ and creator of the blog Skeptical Science (subtitle: “Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism.”). In an analysis of 12,000 abstracts, he found “a 97% consensus among papers taking a position on the cause of global warming in the peer-reviewed literature that humans are responsible.” “Among papers taking a position” is a significant qualifier.

>When the study was recreated at the University of Delaware, it was found that “only 41 papers — 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed. Several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle

>Australian SCIENTIST John Cook

From the skeptical science website, ran by the great Australian scientist John Cook hisself:
>This site was created by John Cook. I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist and web programmer by trade

http://web.archive.org/web/20080213042858/http://www.skepticalscience.com/page.php?p=3

File: thinking.gif (278KB, 373x373px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 373x373px

>>135727576
Of course, that isn't to say the climate ie weather doesn't change at all, it's supposed to, and trying to stop it from doing so would be like trying to change the direction of the earths rotation on it's axis. A feat beyond human capablity. If an ice age or the oceans rise, there isn't a damn thing we can do about it, other than building floodwalls, or fucking moving if the ocean takes the land. As for cold, better look how the russkies survive.