>>13014846>against the greenhouse effect.what the actual fuck
the svensmark theory i support builds on the greenhouse effect but with a different gas
>How?well if it doesnt correlate for most of history you correlation argument is obviously dead how retarded are you
>It is radiative forcing.KEK
and how in the world do you accurately mesure that
send me the paper this is from please
>Wrong. The evidence clearly shows your wrong.well what even is "the evidence" you keep using this word yet you refuse to even explain your exact stance
>I already told you.so you are the same poster but simply chose to randomly answer my posts rather than in order alright
i thought you were a different person
>You're delusional. Every post I've made takes a stance.your stance is literally "trust the experts"
thats not a scientific stance thats a religion
>LOL, I'm not going to do it again.because you cannt and have never done so
you have no opinions on this other than a vague feeling in the back of the head that the media is right because they tell you you are smart for thinking they are right
fucking golem
