Twitter | Search | |
Ruth Mottram
Hej @SteveSGoddard - as an scientist I'd like to know where you got that graphic - it's a complete fake:
Reply Retweet Like More
Joseph Shea 1 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
All the purples are photoshopped out in the animation!
Reply Retweet Like
Ruth Mottram 1 Sep 17
Replying to @JosephShea @dmidk
Yep! And it's quite obvious too...
Reply Retweet Like
Gregory Makles 1 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
The graphic source are presented in his post (links on year bottom). Same as you. Surprised no one else seen it!
Reply Retweet Like
Dr Elisabeth Kosters πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦πŸ‡³πŸ‡± 1 Sep 17
Them and - fake masters: insinuating, misrepresenting, mislabeling etc
Reply Retweet Like
Jens Tholstrup 1 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
Do let us know if you get an answer from Steve...
Reply Retweet Like
Marc Cavallero 1 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
Are you guys mentally challenged. He took the data and isolated the 1+ meter thick ice. Not rocket science. Which is an actual science
Reply Retweet Like
DemoDick69 2 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
They've dedicated so much of their lives to fake climate change it's impossible for them to realize they wasted their lives
Reply Retweet Like
Michael 2 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
I'm with Steve More ice at both Poles More than 300ft of new ice on glaciers in Greenland since WWII that is not fake 300ft in 70yrs
Reply Retweet Like
Will 1 Sep 17
Replying to @ruth_mottram @dmidk
Try opening and reading the article next time. Goddard's data is always accurate, unlike the crap NOAA/NASA distribute. You played yourself.
Reply Retweet Like