Jump to content

Climate Change


3rdnlng

Recommended Posts

You obviously don't have any idea whatsoever how science is done. I want to know your scientific education level so I can know if you are just uneducated or truly an idiot.

Wacka you are one of the craziest people on this board. You think global warming is a hoax. You are just flat out insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wacka you are one of the craziest people on this board. You think global warming is a hoax. You are just flat out insane.

People may think I'm partisan, but they haven't called me crazy. I never said global warming was a hoax. Global warming may occur, but it has not been proven conclusively. The global warming truthers have selectively picked the data they use. It has been shown that many weather stations have been put on hot roofs, next to AC units, etc. Data that doesn't back their view is thrown out. That is NOT science.

It has not been shown that man has ANY effect on global warming if it is indeed happening. Show me reproducible, well analyzed data and after analyzing it the best that I can, maybe I'll believe there is some global warming. Computer simulations are not data. The other planets are warming too, so if there is warming, it is caused by the sun and there is nothing we can do about it.

 

I have a PhD in Molecular Biology (DNA and that stuff you know). I have a patent and several scientific papers.

How many experiments have you done? No, sticking your finger in a light socket to see what happens doesn't count.

 

From what I remember, DC Tom has a Physics background.

 

Speaking of crazy, you believe Bill Nye is a legitimate scientific reference and that Bush and Cheney had WTC 7 blown up. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other planets are warming too, so if there is warming, it is caused by the sun and there is nothing we can do about it.

 

I agree. Yet, it is a very dangerous thing to state. What will keep people in check? Do the "right " thing?

 

This doesn't mean I am disagreeing with you. If what you said above is really the truth, we should all be able to handle that truth and not go overboard and abandon our concern for the environment. Yet, you know many people will and then our world (if not already) is gonna look like a sh*t hole. What do we have in our "arsenal" that will keep people in check?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh! Now I understand why Gary M hates all the wildlife so much and want to kill all of the liberal animals. This makes sense now.

 

I Do not hate wildlife, I love venison stew, goose jerky and rabbit pot pie!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Yet, it is a very dangerous thing to state. What will keep people in check? Do the "right " thing?

 

This doesn't mean I am disagreeing with you. If what you said above is really the truth, we should all be able to handle that truth and not go overboard and abandon our concern for the environment. Yet, you know many people will and then our world (if not already) is gonna look like a sh*t hole. What do we have in our "arsenal" that will keep people in check?

Yet, amazingly, according to your premise, the Clean Air Act was passed in 1970.

 

How do you explain this astonishing act of self-control, without any manufactured and branded hysteria to enforce it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Yet, it is a very dangerous thing to state. What will keep people in check? Do the "right " thing?

 

This doesn't mean I am disagreeing with you. If what you said above is really the truth, we should all be able to handle that truth and not go overboard and abandon our concern for the environment. Yet, you know many people will and then our world (if not already) is gonna look like a sh*t hole. What do we have in our "arsenal" that will keep people in check?

 

 

So instead we should cook up some absurd lie which people in power can use to enrich themselves at the expense of the foolish? Yeah, that'll keep the world from faling into chaos.

Brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok here is some liberal information compiled by liberal scientists who did liberal research funded by liberal money for you to dismiss ad-hominem. The link is a liberal link also, so careful when clicking it, you might get cooties.

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm

 

And obviously since all information is liberal and liberals progress as they learn more information, they are working on an updated version, but it's not due out until 2014.

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ar5/ar5-outline-compilation.pdf

 

Maybe my reading comprehension is lacking (I did go to public school after all), but Wacka was not asking you to provide links to liberal scientists who did liberal research funded by liberal money

 

He was inquiring into your scientific background

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok here is some liberal information compiled by liberal scientists who did liberal research funded by liberal money for you to dismiss ad-hominem. The link is a liberal link also, so careful when clicking it, you might get cooties.

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm

 

You're an idiot. That's not research. That's a review of the literature.

 

And as someone who's written one and reviewed several, let me add: it's a pretty bad one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you and your international recognition know this.

 

Ah, yes..."but there's a consensus!"

 

First, again..."consensus" isn't a scientific principle.

 

Second, if you Google "global warming" you'll find billions of articles and blog posts claiming that global warming is one big hoax. So there's a consensus, so it must be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, yes..."but there's a consensus!"

 

First, again..."consensus" isn't a scientific principle.

 

Second, if you Google "global warming" you'll find billions of articles and blog posts claiming that global warming is one big hoax. So there's a consensus, so it must be true.

Those are pseudo-science articles, and uninformed blog posts. They do not subject themselves to peer review nor to they provide transparency. Most of them don't even provide any good evidence. Among the people that do perform proper scientific research, there is a consensus. And while a consensus does not equal proof, a consensus among such educated and well researched peoples should be taken very very serious by lawmakers and the public in general.

 

Unfortunately anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, please look again. I linked to the "Working Group I Report" which is titled "Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis" which provided the science basis for the report. It is the first of three Working Group Reports that comprise the full AR4 report (plus the Summary for Policymakers). It is not a review of literature, please stop being stupid.

 

I read it when it came out. It's a literature review. And a cherry-picked one at that. It sure as hell isn't anything resembling any sort of scientific research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...