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.
Climate SCIENTISTS are in almost unanimous agreement (97%) that global warming is a major threat to our planet. A reasonable person does not turn to a highly partisan source for vital scientific information. Same old, same old. Just like CNN's reporting of Hurricane Maria was "fake news."
At 1 time didn't MOST scientists agreed that the world was flat?
As usual the point is missed that NO ONE believes that climate doesn't continue to change, as it has since the beginning of time so, repeating it over and over by the left gets nauseating.
The QUESTION is, how much affect does MAN have on the change in climate.
When pressed those that believe man has a GREAT deal to do with that change CANNOT explain how we got an "ice age" and and the melting of the ice age when man hadn't invented ANY of the stuff they now claim is the cause.
Oh, please. If I see the term "fake news" one more time, I'm going to throw up. SCIENCE has not been debunked a few million times. I have no patience with people who obviously know nothing about science and no desire to educate themselves. Your comment about gravity says it all. Stick with the flat earth society and the Spanish Inquisition. The 21st century will not continue to welcome fools gladly, so run along now.
The "97% of scientists agree..." was a fake news! Now go throw up.
Science has been debunked a few million times, and it's still being debunked as we speak.
Oh, please. If I see the term "fake news" one more time, I'm going to throw up. SCIENCE has not been debunked a few million times. I have no patience with people who obviously know nothing about science and no desire to educate themselves. Your comment about gravity says it all. Stick with the flat earth society and the Spanish Inquisition. The 21st century will not continue to welcome fools gladly, so run along now.
since you are supersciency can you give me the actual peer review paper that gave us 97% without looking?
since you are supersciency can you give me the actual peer review paper that gave us 97% without looking?
The problem with the whole 97% argument is that it's basically a bullying tactic used to shut down debate.
You are meant to be intimidated by such a high number, like you are on the wrong side of the argument if there is such a high percentage with the opposing view.
What does 97% percent of scientists even MEAN?
97% agree that man plays a part in climate change but we don't know how much?
97% agree with the alarmist predictions we hear from the IPCC?
Which is it or is it something else entirely?
This always seems to be framed in this simplistic argument of 97% of believers vs non-believers. Believers of WHAT exactly?
This is even assuming for the sake of argument that the 97% percent figure is accurate and was arrived at by ethical, impartial and rigorous means.
Consensus is more in the realm of politics and absolute certainty is more in the realm of hubris.
Neither make for good science.
Last edited by flatfootone; 09-22-2017 at 07:36 AM..
The problem with the whole 97% argument is that it's basically a bullying tactic used to shut down debate.
You are meant to be intimidated by such a high number, like you are on the wrong side of the argument if there is such a high percentage with the opposing view.
What does 97% percent of scientists even MEAN?
97% agree that man plays a part in climate change but we don't know how much?
97% agree with the alarmist predictions we hear from the IPCC?
Which is it or is it something else entirely?
This always seems to be framed in this simplistic argument of 97% of believers vs non-believers. Believers of WHAT exactly?
This is even assuming for the sake of argument that the 97% percent figure is accurate and was arrived at by ethical, impartial and rigorous means.
Consensus is more in the realm of politics and absolute certainty is more in the realm of hubris.
Neither make for good science.
There was HUGE consensus from scientists that Albert Einstein was completely wrong on many of his findings as well.
All political,financial and ego driven.
At 1 time didn't MOST scientists agreed that the world was flat?
No, at the point in which people believed the world was flat there was no such thing as the scientific method, thus scientists did not exist, at least not in the modern sense. Even the ancient Egyptians, at least the brightest of the mathematically proficient ones, had not only calculated the Earth was round, but has also come up with reasonably close approximations of the diameter of the Earth. Ditto for the ancient Greeks. The highly educated members of pretty much any seafaring civilization throughout history understood that the Earth was at the least curved.
The flatness of the Earth was primarily a conceit of the illiterate common people, who relied on what at the time would be called "common sense" and/or religious interpretations to justify said flat Earth belief.
Sounds familiar for some reason...
Last edited by zzzSnorlax; 09-22-2017 at 08:45 AM..
No, at the point in which people believed the world was flat there was no such thing as the scientific method, thus scientists did not exist, at least not in the modern sense. Even the ancient Egyptians, at least the brightest of the mathematically proficient ones, had not only calculated the Earth was round, but has also come up with reasonably close approximations of the diameter of the Earth. The highly educated members of pretty much any seafaring civilization throughout history understood that the Earth was at the least curved.
The flatness of the Earth was primarily a conceit of the illiterate common people, who relied on what at the time would be called "common sense" and/or religious interpretations to justify said flat Earth belief.
Sounds familiar for some reason...
If 100 years later, we look back, none of the scientists would exist in the new "modern sense."
If 100 years later, we look back, none of the scientists would exist in the new "modern sense."
Science evolves.
False, if you go back to the point at which the scientific method was fully codified, every scientist since has been doing what we would now consider science. As will the scientists who continue following it in the future. Science evolves because it is driven to by the framework of the SM, while our knowledge may change and be re-evaluated as nuance is discovered over time, the underlying methodology of research remains the same.
Part of the reason it is hard to take these conspiracy theories seriously, is I have worked around scientists and know the built in bias prevention that goes into that type of research. While I haven't worked at high levels in oil companies or the partisan news websites it seems many people go to for their science information, somehow I doubt they have the same level of bias prevention integrated into their work as the scientists who they love to sh*t on.
Last edited by zzzSnorlax; 09-22-2017 at 08:42 AM..
False, if you go back to the point at which the scientific method was fully codified, every scientist since has been doing what we would now consider science. As will the scientists who continue following it in the future. Science evolves because it is driven to by the framework of the SM, while our knowledge may change and be re-evaluated as nuance is discovered over time, the underlying methodology of research remains the same.
Part of the reason it is hard to take these conspiracy theories seriously, is I have worked around scientists and know the built in bias prevention that goes into that type of research. While I haven't worked at high levels in oil companies or the partisan news websites it seems many people go to for their science information, somehow I doubt they have the same level of bias prevention integrated into their work as the scientists who they love to sh*t on.
Interestingly, the cultists at the IPCC knew they could not build their case using "normal" science... that's why they invented and adopted "post-normal" science.
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.
Even the ancient Egyptians, at least the brightest of the mathematically proficient ones, had not only calculated the Earth was round, but has also come up with reasonably close approximations of the diameter of the Earth. Ditto for the ancient Greeks. The highly educated members of pretty much any seafaring civilization throughout history understood that the Earth was at the least curved.