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.
The consensus is among scientists and their organizations.
Doesn't matter if it's Einstein, Euler, Gauss and Newton having a consensus on something. Until they prove or disprove their hypothesis, it means nothing.
Doesn't matter if it's Einstein, Euler, Gauss and Newton having a consensus on something. Until they prove or disprove their hypothesis, it means nothing.
The only real way to prove it is to wait 100 years and see what happens, I guess.
Hmm. I don't think that's the case. The consensus is that it's human activity that is contributing to it. The disagreements are in what the effects of global warming will be, and if they are any cause for alarm.
In order to believe that global warming theories are false, you would have to believe that scientists and their organizations are either lying by choice or are being coerced into lying about it. I do think the latter could be true, but the "official" opinion is that human activity is contributing to global warming.
They have found other planets undergoing climate change.
There are no humans on those planets.
Now they are looking at sun spot activity which is decreasing.
This is fairly new science and is evolving as new evidence is uncovered.
Is Global Warming Building Steam Or Cooling Off?
snippet:
"As the movement grew and picked up momentum, the alarmist dogma was portrayed as scientific consensus, but the last few years have seen the warming of the earth recede and even the start of global cooling. In addition, new evidence suggests other planets had warmed as much or more, with the increase linked to solar activity, which is seemingly receding.
..
The reality is that the correlation between CO2 levels and global warming is questionable at best. Global temps have been decreasing of late, in the face of increasing levels of CO2, indicating there may be no relationship between it and global temps. "
Now it's becoming clear why Gore refuses to debate this and calls it settled science, a coin name only used with global warming.
The only real way to prove it is to wait 100 years and see what happens, I guess.
You're right. That is why, again, consensus is not science, even among scientists. To intermingle science into policy like this is intellectually bankrupt.
Now how will El Gordo keep his pockets lined at our expense if we are not forced to swallow the so called science supported by those that will profit from it.
Now how will El Gordo keep his pockets lined at our expense if we are not forced to swallow the so called science supported by those that will profit from it.
They got the bill passed in the House. Unless this gets exposed and causes a stir it just may get passed in the Senate depending on how hard "they" work to get votes. Republicans actually spoke about this supressed paper on the House floor on Friday.
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.
