Page 34 of 41 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 403

Thread: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

  1. #331
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,948
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    You're actively (and super obviously) avoiding the question. Why are you attending a meeting of art and philosophy majors in discussing car repair instead of a meeting of car mechanics?

    You can try like everybody else in this thread to draw me away from my point into a debate on global warming all day long, I guarantee you it won't work.
    Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown

    Scientists in this section have made comments that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.



    Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences

    Scientists in this section have made comments that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for human society and/or the Earth's environment. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.


    List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    I'm not seeing any art majors in there. So that'd be another false claim on your part?
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

  2. #332
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,530

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Lol !

    And we're the one's who are scientifically ignorant ?

    In Science there are LAWS and THEORIES, and there are distinctions between the two.

    For example, the Laws of Thermodynamics compared to the Theory of Evolution.

    Laws are empirical statements or descriptions without exception at the time they were created.

    Theories are explanations based on a acquired set of observations that seek to expand the knowledge of that observable phenomena.

    And you're getting no where with the generalizations and hyperbole. No one said all of main stream Science was corrupt.
    So its just the science you disagree with that is corrupt?

    Your rambling about scientific law and theory adds up to what exactly? Were you trying to make a point?

  3. #333
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,056

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    Your post is nothing more than trolling. Is your position so weak (rhetorical question, I already know the answer to that)? I'll mark you down with J-mac as "running away from the question." Anybody else want to take a stab at it?
    Last edited by Cardinal; 07-22-14 at 01:24 PM.

  4. #334
    Guru

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    10-01-17 @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,498

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    The natural composition of the atmosphere contains water and methane and yes they are greenhouse gases. However they are also natural and belong there because of the history of the Earth. This natural cycle is longstanding and slow, its changes happen over thousands of years. Life has adapted to these conditions, slowly, over billions of years.

    Man venting Co2 into the atmosphere is not natural, it is changing the composition of it. This effect is changing the climate through global warming. Why would we not address the man made changes that are causing this change?

    We need some greenhouse gases to keep the Earth warm, it is a balance that has been worked out over millions of years. We are upsetting this balance.
    I agree with almost everything you posted, here, except for your implication: that man is the main causer of global warming. Heck, it's possible a virulent global warming is upon us now. Who knows, however? There are ideologues everywhere one turns on this issue.
    Last edited by cabse5; 07-22-14 at 01:36 PM.

  5. #335
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,321

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    So its just the science you disagree with that is corrupt?

    Your rambling about scientific law and theory adds up to what exactly? Were you trying to make a point?

    If you're unable to understand my point then that's on you, not me.

    Your " scientific " generalizations needed to be corrected.

    At least your Capitalization skills seem to be intact.

    Corruption is using adjusted numbers to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.

    And that's exactly what the NOAA did when they claimed that July 2012 was the hottest month on record.

  6. #336
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,571
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    What we are talking about here is the scientific method.

    Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Step by step:

    1. Formulation of a question
    2. Hypothesis
    3. Prediction
    4. Testing
    5. Analysis



    If the hypothesis passes peer review, and the results duplicated in a number of instances, it becomes a scientific theory or law and is generally accepted, until someone comes up with an instance where it fails, and the whole process starts all over again.

    Constant refinement, testing and challenging.
    And when the refinement, testing, and challenging reveals that the original theory was wrong again and again and again, at what point does science figure out that maybe a new and different approach is warranted? If science never moved on from flawed theories we would still believe in the flat Earth theory, that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects, that the Earth is the center of the universe with the sun and stars revolving around it, that leaches draw impurities from the blood, etc. etc. etc.

    How many times will we allow the climate modelers to be wrong, to move the goal posts again and again and again, before we figure out that maybe they don't really know what they are talking about? Again, how gullible are we supposed to be?
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  7. #337
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,530

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    If you're unable to understand my point then that's on you, not me.

    Your " scientific " generalizations needed to be corrected.

    At least your Capitalization skills seem to be intact.

    Corruption is using adjusted numbers to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.

    And that's exactly what the NOAA did when they claimed that July 2012 was the hottest month on record.
    Vagueness as a self defense mechanism.

    Didn't triple goofs already debunk your NOAA diatribe? In all seriousness... does it really matter that they made a mistake? A mistake that they corrected... Is this the pivotal piece of evidence that makes or breaks AGW?

  8. #338
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,948
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    Your post is nothing more than trolling. Is your position so weak (rhetorical question, I already know the answer to that)? I'll mark you down with J-mac as "running away from the question." Anybody else want to take a stab at it?
    My, how easily you dismiss legitimate and scientifically based experts in the field when it doesn't support your position, rather than legitimately defend your position.

    Your position is 'why are you listening / believing art majors about a scientific field'. I produced a lengthy list of scientific people learned in the field that oppose the conclusions, and you say that's a weak argument.

    Hmm. Somehow I'm lead to the conclusion that your argument is weaker than you are letting on or allow yourself to admit.
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

  9. #339
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,056

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    My, how easily you dismiss legitimate and scientifically based experts in the field when it doesn't support your position, rather than legitimately defend your position.

    Your position is 'why are you listening / believing art majors about a scientific field'. I produced a lengthy list of scientific people learned in the field that oppose the conclusions, and you say that's a weak argument.

    Hmm. Somehow I'm lead to the conclusion that your argument is weaker than you are letting on or allow yourself to admit.
    You were deliberately misrepresenting my argument, which was an analogy in choosing between art/philosophy majors and car mechanics in understanding car repair. So why, in that analogy, are you choosing art philosophy majors in better understanding car repair?

  10. #340
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,649

    Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    Vagueness as a self defense mechanism.

    Didn't triple goofs already debunk your NOAA diatribe? In all seriousness... does it really matter that they made a mistake? A mistake that they corrected... Is this the pivotal piece of evidence that makes or breaks AGW?
    Please dont fall into his fantasy of saying NOAA 'made a mistake'.

    NOAA reclassified this because of new and improved historical data that they have uncovered.

    Its really only of significance to the deniers, anyway. A record of the hottest month in the US (not the globe) vs. one that was virtually identically hot is just an outlier in a highly variable set of data. But when the outliers tend to bunch up in a single decade, decade after decade, in the US as well as the world... thats a signal.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

Page 34 of 41 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •