aoc dialog

Yep totally made it up for laughs

Don't get me wrong! I love laughs!

But this is no laughing matter and throws thousands of scientists' life's work in the garbage can

This laugh is on politicians (not AOC in particular) using the extraordinary amounts of data as a platform to misuse their public forums ignorantly and flippantly on camera as if they had dedicated their life to collecting the data themselves, just wrapped up in a meme for a laugh. I agree it is a serious topic. Thanks for the honest feedback, I typically won't provide this much but recognize the honesty. Enjoy, check out my others hopefully for laugh up to 97.35% will (yes a stat made up on the spot) 😁

Admittedly, AOC is not a climate scientist. And I've seen her make misstatements on this topic. The Green New Deal rollout was a mess, and we do not need to ban cows and airplanes to fight climate change.

But: the vast majority, perhaps 100%, of our representatives are also not climate scientists. And I think AOC's misstatements on climate pale in comparison to the outright distortions I've seen on the other sign.

At a certain point, all of us whether we're in politics or not have to use the information we're given and make a judgment call about these issues. As for myself, I've made an effort to understand the science and I feel it's my duty now to share what I've found with my fellow average citizens.

Thank you for your feedback and Merry Christmas.

You too, keep challenging people to being smart as will I!

Other side*

What you mean all the fraudulent data that's come out has been removed and replaced by real science?

Here's an explanation of real science https://www.afa.net/the-stand/culture/2019/07/90-scientists-global-warming-is-a-total-hoax/
Here's how science works: one scientist plots one data point, then another scientist uses that point as a reference and builds on that work. This continues until you have a full model. The climate change models are based on many if these pyramids. Most if the pyramids have at least one fraudulent or sketchy data point.
Take this equation and solve for Y, assume X is 10: X + 5 * Y = 30.
You got the wrong answer because X is actually 5.

Prove its 97% using a double blind questionnaire study.

https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-advanced.htm

This ought to be good enough

What skeptics don't realize is that we're allowed to be skeptical about their skepticism. And this site does a great job with that.