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.
I guess according to your logic former NOAA Award-Winning Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Rex Fleming would follow in the category of non rational thinking...Dr Fleming joins many former UN IPCC and U.S. government scientists publicly dissenting on man-made climate change. Fleming declares that "CO2 has no impact on climate change."
"Past climates have been warm and cold and warm and cold with no changes in carbon dioxide. How can that be a cause when there's no correlation."
Fleming 8:10 on AMS, AGU, AAAS: "all 3 of those organizations will not support a "denier"..I could not get published in any of those organizations..as a denier..I had to go to Europe to publish a paper..it was peer-reviewed in Europe, it got thru, & it has been very successful"
Quote Tweet
I don't have a problem with guys like Rex Fleming. He has solid credentials so I assume knows the science. My complaint is with the millions of people who say climate change is a hoax simply because Trump says it is a hoax. The fact is, the vast majority of the science community believes it to be a real problem. We accept the verdict of a jury, so why won't we accept the verdict of a panel of scientists? They are going to be as impacted as the rest of us will be by their recommendations, so they aren't doing this for personal gain; they would be better off lying about it.
Anyway, maybe I will read Fleming's book. I like to look at both sides.
Should science be a democracy? Can truth be put up to vote? And are scientists without bias?
Science never votes on the truth, that is why even the oldest and most accepted principles are still called theories and they are constantly tested and re-tested for validity. But at some point the rubber hits the road and public policy needs to be decided based on the current science, and really the only mechanism we have on hand is a democratic one - do the preponderance of scientists believe it to be true? And that is exactly where we are with climate change.
Scientists are human and have bias, just like a jury has. But you expect that with a large number of jurors that bias get washed out. But I am 100% certain that there is no conspiracy among scientists.
Wow! The amazing world wide conspiracy of nearly every sentient being (the GOP excepted, of course) has managed to hide one million square miles of sea ice! And fake all those fires in Alaska and Siberia and Greenland!
Belief in global warming is optional. However, participation is mandatory.
Kellyann , what did we tell you about making up those "alternative facts"? Shame on you.
Well, that's the million dollar question, isn't it? I don't know why repubs loathe science so much. I guess they're under orders from their masters at Exxon and BP and let's not forget the Koch brothers.
That's the ticket, if you are GOP, you hate science... You liberal snowflakes say the same lying crap over and over... We also work for oil companies and Koch, you liberal snowflakes are getting smarter over time.... /End sarcasm
But at some point the rubber hits the road and public policy needs to be decided based on the current science
Has the rubber hit the road? When will it hit the road? What rubber are we talking about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoByFour
I am 100% certain that there is no conspiracy among scientists.
But no scientist agrees with any other scientist. The only thing we have that is close to a consensus is that our emissions are having an effect on the climate.
I can say with 100% certainty that every single climate-model and ever single climate prediction is wrong. But the predictions range from mild to catastrophic. Should we always plan for the worst? At what cost? And who is going to get the money we spend?
Wow! The amazing world wide conspiracy of nearly every sentient being (the GOP excepted, of course) has managed to hide one million square miles of sea ice! And fake all those fires in Alaska and Siberia and Greenland!
Belief in global warming is optional. However, participation is mandatory.
Yes, Global Warming is quite real and has been occurring for thousands of years....where I am currently used to be a sheet of ice and is now quite pleasant....thank you GW
Millions of acres on fire in Alaska, millions and millions of acres ablaze in Russia, the Amazon burning, heat waves in Europe and the US, fish dying, ice sheets rapidly disappearing and ocean currents changing and it is all a hoax.
The real hoax is being perpetuated by the hucksters and jackals of the fossil fuel industry who promulgate lies undermining the science of climate change for religious or political reasons. These people could care less about the fate of your children or even there own children.
The science of climate change has been settled for two decades. The chickens are coming home to roost.
The earth heats and cools periodically. That’s the only settled science. The rest is hypothesis and supposition supported by guesswork.
I'll let you cultists in on a secret (since I know you won't listen)... exaggerated climate porn is counter-productive.
It may cause more true believers to glue themselves to sidewalks, but "normal" folks see the crazy and tune you out.
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.
