The main question: How in the HELL does a “scientific” paper get published by Springer with “bullshit” in the title and used over 100 times in the paper? Is this an example of anything goes “pay for play?” What next? Scientific social musings on the F-Word in the context of people you don’t like?
From Tom Nelson:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What I want to know is….
Where are our local blog AGW trollettes to defend this article !
I doubt any would come out against this sort of garbage.
You might want to Google that + “Lewandowsky”
The second explanatory note at the end of this paper is “…no claim is being made about what a climate denier believes”. That would seem to be a significant hindrance to potential proof of its accuracy….you know….scientifically speaking….
Plainly, the entire paper is a huge steaming heap of psychological projection.
As always, every single thing the left accuses others of, it exactly what they themselves are doing.
As for that photograph, per the UN agenda of switching us all to a bug diet, the younger generation simply will not know what meatballs are.