Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's no 'proof' that our pollution affects the earth? Are people really this stupid? I don't need a scientist to tell me what I see with my own eyes. Science changes every day, there are no 'facts'.
There's no 'proof' that our pollution affects the earth? Are people really this stupid? I don't need a scientist to tell me what I see with my own eyes. Science changes every day, there are no 'facts'.
Who said that?
I stated that micro pollution does not establish macro causation.
You understand what that means right?
Just in case you don't, let me explain.
What it means is that while we do have evidence of pollution causing issues at local levels (micro), this does not establish that such occurrences have significant effect on our entire climate system (macro).
It would be unscientific to attempt to claim that such is the case.
Our understanding of the world does change, but our understanding of it and what we "accept" to be true does not change until proper process of evaluation (empirical verification, validation, replication) establish such a transition. Science does not change itself, in fact... it is that process which helps us to establish a given understanding. Without such a detailed and rigorous process of evaluation, truth would simply be that of the stronger consensus and such is not a component of science (for good reason).
I stated that micro pollution does not establish macro causation.
You understand what that means right?
Just in case you don't, let me explain.
What it means is that while we do have evidence of pollution causing issues at local levels (micro), this does not establish that such occurrences have significant effect on our entire climate system (macro).
It would be unscientific to attempt to claim that such is the case.
Our understanding of the world does change, but our understanding of it and what we "accept" to be true does not change until proper process of evaluation (empirical verification, validation, replication) establish such a transition. Science does not change itself, in fact... it is that process which helps us to establish a given understanding. Without such a detailed and rigorous process of evaluation, truth would simply be that of the stronger consensus and such is not a component of science (for good reason).
Yeah whatever. You can get as technical as you want, but the amount of carbon we put into the air DOES affect the planet. Why make it so complicated? Its really SIMPLE. All the chemicals/drugs/waste we put on the earth can't clean itself at the rate we are going. Its UNSUSTAINABLE. All systems man made are unsustainable. I see it more as like this: 1 + 1 = 2. Really simple, really easy. You want to insert things in there to make 1 + 1 = 0. Its not complicated. Its really easy, you don't need a scientist or some scientist wanna be to try and let their ego dictate why it isn't 2. Every action has an equal or opposite reaction. That's all that needs to be said about what is happening. Science is a beautiful thing, but science with an ego....quite damaging.
Yeah whatever. You can get as technical as you want, but the amount of carbon we put into the air DOES affect the planet. Why make it so complicated? Its really SIMPLE.
Apparently not simple enough to establish this through scientific process. If this were as evident as you seem to suggest, then CAGW would have been empirically validated long ago. It hasn't, and that is because the hypothesis can not seem to be validated other than through simple claims made by those who only use science as a catch word in their appeals of authority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjay
All the chemicals/drugs/waste we put on the earth can't clean itself at the rate we are going. Its UNSUSTAINABLE. All systems man made are unsustainable. I see it more as like this: 1 + 1 = 2. Really simple, really easy. You want to insert things in there to make 1 + 1 = 0. Its not complicated. Its really easy, you don't need a scientist or some scientist wanna be to try and let their ego dictate why it isn't 2. Every action has an equal or opposite reaction. That's all that needs to be said about what is happening. Science is a beautiful thing, but science with an ego....quite damaging.
I think you need to get an education in a hard science. You seem to be rather ignorant of its process and I have no interest in arguing with your arrogance of such ignorance.
Apparently not simple enough to establish this through scientific process. If this were as evident as you seem to suggest, then CAGW would have been empirically validated long ago. It hasn't, and that is because the hypothesis can not seem to be validated other than through simple claims made by those who only use science as a catch word in their appeals of authority.
I think you need to get an education in a hard science. You seem to be rather ignorant of its process and I have no interest in arguing with your arrogance of such ignorance.
Good luck with that.
Yeah, I'm the arrogant one.
Science isn't what I'm interested in. You appear to be a scientist wannabe. That doesn't make me anything except not interested in the same things that you are. Everyone is 'ignorant' in many things. Everyone excels at something. I don't need to be a scientist to observe with my own eyes, nor to have an opinion on everything I see and live everyday. I and many other people (who are not particularly interested in science) will continue to have opinions on these events going on around us, whether you deem them to be good enough to debate means nothing. My worth is not dictated by my personal interests. So get the f over yourself.
We affect the earth, and I don't think 'science' should be what determines that. How about f-ing common sense???!!!!
If global warming is a real threat, we are done. Our hierarchical political and economic systems, our life priorities and aspirations, our way of life, infrastructure, etc. have to be reversed almost 180 degrees to handle the challenge of this magnitude. And even then ... Probability of this is exactly zero. Al Gore' "solutions" are nowhere near what I described and yet he's ostracized by greater chunk of population for the "radical" suggestion of the green consumerism that is supposed to deliver us from all ecological evils. There is small probability of global war and/or a dictatorships thinning the herd and continuing business as usual for little bit longer.
It doesn't really matter what you believe in, nothing can be done, so why we wouldn't just embrace merry go lucky attitude of plwhit who figured this envirowacko conspiracy thing out and could not care less. As long as we have a Frankenstein burger on a chemical bun, life is good.
It's proven by the brightest minds employed in the Creation Science that CO2 emissions have no effect on anything. Read your Bible, it says nothing about CO2 or Global Warming.
That is why you are disqualified from this discussion. This is an issue of science, not your pet project to soap box to idiots in hopes that they will appeal to your dogma. The issue is Climate science. Either you can argue a scientific position, or you are no different than the religious zealots proclaiming to the village that if they do not stone the witches of you accusation for their evil, they will be punished by your god.
Sorry, but if you want to preach you religion, the religious forums are ---->
Take care now!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
