Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
Priceless. So no background in science, no publications, no faculty appointments, no scientific presentations and you are an "expert" in science and evaluating the scientific literature.
|
I keep hearing of your "credentials" but have seen nothing coming from you that discredits the
overwhelming majority of climate researchers who:
A) Understand basic science
B) Recognize mankind's contribution to the
statistically proven fact the earth is rapidly warming.
Instead I am given a link to Senator Inhofe's blog, an infamous climate change denier who was in charge under Bush of being their point man on denying climate change research. Watching the GOP debate I hear of how it will "cripple the economy" to have any "regulations" on pollution by people with:
1) Financial motive to lie
2) No understanding of science
As an avowed hater of all things liberal, is it any wonder you line up with these people politically, and that your motivations are more political than scientific?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
So now it is 95%? You are simply pulling these numbers out of the air and have no clue as to what percentage of scientists who actually deal with climate support or contend the concept of global warming. No clue. Yet you are as confident with your "98%" number as you are with the belief that man made CO2 is causing global warming  ! Here is where you got your false 98% number.
ICECAP
This is how we got a community organizer in the White House. |
Would you be happier if I said "overwhelming majority" instead of using a percentage that I cannot accurately verify?
You see, there is a reason that this population is an overwhelming majority, it is because science is largely provable, and those studying it are scientists, using scientific research and analysis that all leads to the same conclusion that the earth is getting warmer as a result of mankind's use of fossil fuels. Denialists quibble that there is nothing "absolute", and they are correct, but how does that dispute the voluminous data that is both peer reviewed and largely in agreement based on scientific analysis? Well, it must be a conspiracy then!
So it really does not matter if your population reaches 10%, and that hacks, posers, disgruntled former climate researchers, even genuine true believers stand in stark contrast to those using scientific research to arrive at a conclusion that is reinforced through the use of basic science and repeated observations backed by climate data from thousands of years prior. You and others dispute this research because they cannot predict the future with absolute certainty? Such doubt is certainly not motivated by science!
Again, you may have written an in depth examination of toenail fungus using a variety of scientific methods and been lauded by your peers, but when it comes to climate change research you are no better qualified than I am. And I agree with the overwhelming majority of researchers because I believe in science, while you believe in paranoid fantasies of cover-ups and scandals peddled by people like Sen. Inhofe and Rush Limbaugh.
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.
