Originally Posted by caliboy1994
Saying that the defunct global cooling alarmism in the 70s is makes global warming invalid is like saying that the defunct theory of spontaneous generation makes germ theory invalid. You can't use previous science that has been proven wrong to attempt to debunk science that has so far been proven right now. Not only is that logically fallacious, it flies straight in the face of the scientific method. You know how you debunk climate change? Become a scientist yourself, do a scientific study, and if you manage to conclusively disprove global climate change, collect your Nobel Prize and go home. But clearly you are no scientist so you have no authority to make these kinds of statements and expect them to be accepted as true.
No, I debunked it, because the Russian scientist assumed that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, which goes against 150 years of established scientific knowledge. Also, the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature study was funded by the Koch Brothers, so your argument is well....sort of...invalid.
So now you are the authority on whose study is credible based on who is funding what? Have you graduated with a degree in climate science, if not, according to your own words you have no authority to make any kind of statements either. I studied global warming in college also (actually was duped into believing it at the time). I guess neither of us should even be debating this in this thread then since we have no authority.