In reply to the pretentious, self-righteous bile she wrote in “Gleick’s Testimony on Threats to the Integrity of Science,”:
Just who do you think you are to preach to anybody else about ethics?
Over and over you lie to these people, mostly to portray your betters in the scientific community as liars, no less! Here is just one example:
Kauffman, et al hypothesize that the relative slowdown in warming between 1998 – 2008 compared to the entire period since 1953 is due to three factors, including reduced incoming solar radiation (“insolation”) and La Nina.
But you deliberately lied to your readers, to give the false impression that Kaufman, et al investigated only Chinese aerosols.
The authors argue that the sulfates associated with this coal consumption have been sufficient [no, they do not] to counter the greenhouse gas warming during the period 1998-2008… [emphasis added]
The truth is that they argue only that sulfates are one of three major cooling factors, the other being reduced insolation and La Nina. Of course, your most ardent followers won’t see for themselves, even though I put the proof right in front of their ignorant faces.
Lucky for you. It seems you know your target audience well enough to keep them coming back for more of the garbage you write, to validate their denial. If that’s what you consider an accomplishment, “congratulations.”