Here is an educational response to the childish claims made by Mr. Anonymous in a comment I rejected December 12, 2019, because he was hiding too much garbage within his text. I have made a screen shot of his comments and will build a stand alone informative post around it.
Understanding the science is not easy, it requires good-faith homework, something I fear the likes of our Anonymous resents, since they seem to believe that ideology can explain everything.
It concerns me that the debate stooped to this level, but it is symptomatic of the general atmosphere surrounding the climate change issues. A recent personal attack by the PIK cosigner on other scientists in Die Zeit is another example. I strive to refrain from the divisive public discussion of political ramifications (Kyoto) and would not conceive of attacking the scientific integrity of the IPCC-supporting scientists, despite the fact that these models too have a plethora of weak points (clouds, biology...) and yield predictions that are inconsistent with reality (balloons and satellites show no tropospheric temperature rise, the Antarctic and Greenland are mostly cooling...).
As scientists, we are not infallible and may eventually be proven wrong, but this should be done by factual science and not by denunciation of our scientific integrity in press releases.
Anonymous12/12 strikes again and again I will not post a comment with coding embedded in it.
“Comments here will be deleted that do not agree with the misleading intentions of the blogger.”
Also you need to be honest and able to support your claims, so far all you’ve done is call me names and paint a deliberately misleading slanderous image of who I am.
At least I present supporting evidence when I disparage specific peddlers of dishonest information. Good faith constructive debate is the key concept if you want to comment over here.
When it comes to my essence, what’s driven me, it’s always been about developing an ever deeper understanding our Earth, her story, humanity and my place in this pageant.
Oh and I have posted your previous comments, on my terms.