re: #363 LudwigVanQuixote

So let’s look at that abstract:

What happened was the standard, deniers saw the word cosmic ray, and assumed the paper debunked AGW without reading it trick.

What garbage.

This is a paper about the ozone hole. It does have an impact on warming believe it or don’t but it is not a primary driver at all.

I know the idea of actually reading a paper before making claims about it is anathema to the denier sphere, but you all could actually try it. It would save me time and you embarrassment.

Yes — it’s the same old same old. The reason why at least four people have now dumped this nonsense all over LGF is right here:

74.125.155.132

Anthony Watts is doing his usual denial dance. It’s the bogus claim of the day.