A895
Well-known member
I actually was looking for the WSJ article (you know paywall and all that), and this article came up, and it turns the authors of the WSJ article had vested interest in debunking climate change.Just because the Koch brothers paid some scientists to debunk common thinking doesn't make the 97% false either. Or so says Salon. (They aren't exactly unbiased of course.)
Isn't picking the evidence that matches our POV exactly what we should all avoid?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think that should be ignored.