happened.

Now I'll just continue on this point and thank you for the call. So think about that. Now let me ask you this. The climate science is really based on, but not based on but let's say depends on, measurements. In other words there's somebody measuring the ocean. There's somebody measuring the ice. There's somebody measuring the temperature of the ocean. Somebody measuring the temperature of land. How many people in the whole universe are involved in just the measurement part? How many people are climate scientists who are directly involved in measuring? Because they're really the only ones who sort of know what's going on. Like they have the best idea whether their measurements are crazy or if they fudge things or if they've exaggerated.

So I would say if you're looking at all climate scientists almost none of them have been directly involved in the most basic part of climate science which is measuring the temperature over time. If you haven't been involved in that then you are simply believing the people who did. So in other words you don't have 97% of scientists who have all personally done every part of climate science and come to the same answer. We're not talking about a group of people who all went out and put out their own thermometers. They all went out. They personally measured the ice. They're all depending on a very small group of people who are involved in say satellite measurements, land-based thermometers. It's got to be a pretty small population.

All right so the 97% thing is ridiculous. I'm sticking my microphone back in. I don't know if that'll make a difference or not. So since I don't know if you can still hear me but I hope you can. Don't you need a pretty big talent stack also to have a clue? Yeah you would have to have talent across multiple fields to be a climate scientist who had a solid opinion of things. You'd have to know at least a little bit about a lot of different fields and that's probably rare. I would imagine there are m