in USA alone for example almost 50 percent of the studies are government funded

then think about all the others

einstien wasn't funded

im talking about today

even today

nah today majority of studies require large fundings

23% of studies aren't funded

and thats not a small minority

yes that is a minority and those studies without much fundings are using poor methodology

usually analyzing and interpeting data

not conducting anything really

so what are you trying to say

what are you trying to prove, ultimately.

nevermind

i forgot what i tried to point out

exactly

i believe i meant that main stream research should be taken with high skepticism

and it is

thats why the scientific method exists

well you guys were talking about climate science i doubt any scientific method was used there

it was

fine show me

what scientific method they used to prove humans cause global warming

guess what, they cant

in order for them to properly use the scientific method there, they would need to replicate a copy of the earth without humans and see if global warming happens

this is what a scientific method is, and just like many other fields of studies, climate science is very inaccurate simply because its near impossible to use the scientific method

https://climate.nasa.gov/

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

so you mind explaining

NASA is already a discredited witness. any judge would throw out all their evidence in court

how did they discover man-made climate change

what methodology was used to come up with this conclusion

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

im asking you

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

yes. this is an organization we can trust....

even if i trust nasa, whats the scientific method used

in the post he linked about human causes