you just have to look at what the consensus science says. i agree with chad. you have to get beyond taking every single event and link to climate change. we can no the throw out the baby with the bath water. we know the climate is changing and human beings are contributing to it. for example, one of the things that s interesting about the recent snowstorms we have had here in the east and south, jeff masters in weather underground, they noted that we used to have a lot more of these big ice storms and winter storms. because the frequency has decreased, we have forgotten how to deal with cold weather in these big storms. that s likely because of some of the climate warming that we have seen. all of this banter and discussion about what we call it, that is smoke and mirrors. i like to stay with the signal rather than the noise. the peer review literature is clear. i look at what the arctic sea
tonight in the crossfire we ve got folks that can help us. levine nyack and david criteser who studied climate change for the heritage foundation, one of my favorite. we ll send you a pledge card. that s good. it s up where we got to get you over there. you and i have been talking about this issue for many years. i don t understand how you can have a position that you ve got right now. a lot of people are saying that 97% of the peer-review literature in this field says that humans are causing climate change. let me show you who does not agree with that. donald trump, professor donald trump is on your side. it s very expensive global warming bs, that s a scientific term, it s got to stop. professor erick erickson says the difference between the people who believe in the second coming of jesus and those who believe in global warming is that jesus in fact will return. can you explain to me why you re
no if this is a camouflage, this is the only camouflage this is the biggest journalistic scoop that you could get, just by reading the identification line at the end of an op-ed, or by going to a website, right? there s no secret that epi is funded by businesses. we re completely up-front about that. but you don t like our point of view. and labor unions don t like our point of view. so instead of engaging our facts, they just want to try to discredit us and say, well, you re funded by wiz businesses. let s have a discussion. since the paper, we have seen a preponderance of evidence in the literature, which is going to become quite robust. debunked in the exact same journal no, it was not. it was not debunked. it was. the preponderance of the facts, in the peer review literature, which does not emanate out of some office suite run by rick berman shows that the things have not materialized in discontinuity study after discontinuity study that remains
washington, where what interest groups, corporate interest groups are pushing is camouflaged as something academic. there s nothing there s no if this is a camouflage, this is the only camouflage this is the biggest journalistic scoop that you could get, just by reading the identification line at the end of an op-ed, or by going to a website, right? there s no secret that epi is funded by businesses. we re completely up-front about that. but you don t like our point of view. and labor unions don t like our point of view. so instead of engaging our facts, they just want to try to discredit us and say, well, you re funded by wiz businesses. let s have a discussion. since the paper, we have seen a preponderance of evidence in the literature, which is going to become quite robust. debunked in the exact same journal no, it was not. it was not debunked. it was. the preponderance of the facts, in the peer review literature, which does not emanate out of some office suite
groups are pushing is camouflaged as something academic. there s nothing there s no if this is a camouflage, this is the only camouflage this is the biggest journalistic scoop that you could get, just by reading the identification line at the end of an op-ed, or by going to a website, right? there s no secret that epi is funded by businesses. we re completely up-front about that. but you don t like our point of view. and labor unions don t like our point of view. so instead of engaging our facts, they just want to try to discredit us and say, well, you re funded by wiz businesses. let s have a discussion. since the paper, we have seen a preponderance of evidence in the literature, which is going to become quite robust. debunked in the exact same journal no, it was not. it was not debunked. it was. the preponderance of the facts, in the peer review literature, which does not emanate out of some office suite run by rick berman shows that the things have not material