>>366

Because I am trying to understand what it is that you actually believe. You say you don't claim that climate scientists are liars, and you claim that only stupid ones believe in global warming, yet the vast majority of climate science papers support it - so how are you explaining this discrepancy? Are you saying that:

1. Most climate scientists are stupid, and their peer reviewers is stupid, and the entire field of climate science is a sham?
2. Most climate scientists are lying, and their peer reviewers are accepting their lies, and the entire filed of climate science is a sham?
3. Most climate scientists are, in fact, not publishing anything at all?