theodewere

you go ahead and do your checking, little fella.. be sure and let me know what your code has to say..

i didn't say you were naturally stupid, just that you are using a stupid argument.. it's just a fact.. if you don't want me to point out the stupidity of your arguments, you shouldn't use stupid argumentation..

maybe you're a little defensive because you're full of shit

that's exactly how science comes into existence.. one study and paper at a time.. whoever taught you otherwise was lying or stupid..

you're just making shit up, you have no idea what you're talking about

you've obviously never read a scientific paper.. if you understood anything about science, you would see that this method of determining sea temperature changes produces a dataset that is much more reliable than the data we have been referring to..

the scientific process is demonstrated in their paper.. if you can find fault in their methods, then there is controversy, otherwise their findings are fact.. "criticism" in science is done with research, not comments on the internet or to news outlets..

until someone finds a reason why this method might be unreliable, it isn't controversial.. it's a scientific fact with implications..