The Attempt to Establish a Climate Ministry of Truth

Already did, multiple times.

 

Off topic.

 

By repeating one person’s opinion from a blog. Nope.

 

Direct response to your #565.

 

Evidence.

 

So you repeat the same unreliable opinion of a single person from a blog three times, and it becomes there sources.

Nope.

 

The facts are indisputable.
BBC’s Fake Climate Audit Screengrab

 

Response from #576

 

Assertions you can’t prove. You can’t even state them yourself. Blog of an opinion is no evidence.

 

Nothing from me is needed. The evidence speaks for itself.
BBC’s Fake Climate Audit Screengrab

 

It is obviously fake. Claiming he’s reliable because he voted for Al Gore seems absurd. It’s apparent the evidence is unreliable, even to you.

 

They are disputable because all you can give for reference for provider is, he voted for Al Gore.

 

Hmmm. You'll have to explain why you think it's "obviously fake." Please keep in mind the post includes a link to the BBC broadcast.

 

Sorry, but that's nonsensical.

 

The link to the broadcast means nothing. You have shown no evidence that the provider is correct in what he says…just because he voted for Al Gore, is obviously a scam to link him to a reliable source.

 

The facts have been presented. Good luck in your future endeavors.

 

I agree. Trying to make a,provider reliable by saying he voted for Al Gore seemed nonsense to me, just like a post from a single person from a blog.

 

They won’t be about a climate ministry from a blog by a person whose reliability is determined by who he voted for…that’s for sure.

 

I don’t have to explain anything about the lack of evidence. It’s you who have to explain why you think who a person votes for makes him reliable or not while posting an opinion from a blog.

 

I’ll help you for your next attempt on this topic..In general, blogs should not be considered a reliable scholarly source. Many are strongly opinionated and can lack the professionalism expected.

 

If you can prove it's a fabrication, do so. If you can't, who are you to claim you know the truth and they don't even when you can't prove it?

 

No, I'll help you.

We are not interested in scholarly sources, just informative ones, because what we post here does not consist of term papers.

Whether a blog is a credible source or not depends on the quality of the material it presents, not on the fact that it is a blog.

You apparently have a ways to go before you will understand logic and scientific reasoning.

 

smh

 

No one serious uses blogs for evidence. They use reliable institutional sources. Obviously, you’re not interested in anything but being entertained. Science doesn't use blogs for evidence. That’s just you using woo woo. Good bye

 

Unreliable. In the rights own words, you can’t trust anyone from the “learned elite.” He must be. He voted for all Gore.,