• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

You still have yet to present the science you say exists to support this. You claim there is a consensus and that is your proof that there is a consensus. That's just a tad circular.

You proudly proclaim that you do not understand the science, do not present the science and rely only on the opinion of those that cannot support their assertions with real world, actual proof.

Not sure why you and j are being dishonest, but I've given you may links supporting that it exists. You silly folks accept far less support than I've given you. :lamo
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Not from other novices. That would be stupid.

"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance". -Confucius.

You are absolutely certain that what you do not understand that does not make sense is absolutely and irrefutably true.

You don't need to ask questions of people that you erroneously classify as novices. You only need to ask what else must be true for this to be true.

You will never learn anything outside of your foolish consistency until you understand that what you accept as an absolute is not even a defined hypothesis. The experts upon whom you rely cannot take the first step in defining what they are striving so ardently to sell because there is no solid ground on which they may base their work.


World English Dictionary
novice (ˈnɒvɪs)

— n
1. a. a person who is new to or inexperienced in a certain task, situation, etc; beginner; tyro
b. ( as modifier ): novice driver
2. a probationer in a religious order
3. a sportsman, esp an oarsman, who has not won a recognized prize, performed to an established level, etc
4. a racehorse, esp a steeplechaser or hurdler, that has not won a specified number of races

[C14: via Old French from Latin novīcius, from novus new]
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Not sure why you and j are being dishonest, but I've given you may links supporting that it exists. You silly folks accept far less support than I've given you. :lamo



Nice emoticon. Must really knock their socks off at PS 57.

You have not. You post links to articles that say nothing. Post the link and then cut and paste the salient point that you are trying to base your assertion on.

I have asked you to do this repeatedly and you have declined the opportunity. The only conclusion from this is that you do not have the proof. Since the proof does not exist, this is not surprising. What is surprising is that, if you have actually tried to find the proof and failed, why you still believe it exists. Like a sad Templar searching for the Grail.

No evidence, no proof and no results. Only faith and reliance on what you have been taught by the folks who have a stake in forming your opinion, not in opening your eyes.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance". -Confucius.

You are absolutely certain that what you do not understand that does not make sense is absolutely and irrefutably true.

You don't need to ask questions of people that you erroneously classify as novices. You only need to ask what else must be true for this to be true.

You will never learn anything outside of your foolish consistency until you understand that what you accept as an absolute is not even a defined hypothesis. The experts upon whom you rely cannot take the first step in defining what they are striving so ardently to sell because there is no solid ground on which they may base their work.


World English Dictionary
novice (ˈnɒvɪs)

— n
1. a. a person who is new to or inexperienced in a certain task, situation, etc; beginner; tyro
b. ( as modifier ): novice driver
2. a probationer in a religious order
3. a sportsman, esp an oarsman, who has not won a recognized prize, performed to an established level, etc
4. a racehorse, esp a steeplechaser or hurdler, that has not won a specified number of races

[C14: via Old French from Latin novīcius, from novus new]

You have the strangest beliefs, unsupported beliefs.


Reality Check: Numerous scientific studies have confirmed that the Earth is warming and that the rate of warming is increasing. Average temperatures have climbed 1.4°F (0.8°C) around the world since 1880. Much of the temperature increase happened in recent decades, coinciding with a spike of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

Fact Checking 6 Persistent Science Conspiracy Theories
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

You have the strangest beliefs, unsupported beliefs.


Reality Check: Numerous scientific studies have confirmed that the Earth is warming and that the rate of warming is increasing. Average temperatures have climbed 1.4°F (0.8°C) around the world since 1880. Much of the temperature increase happened in recent decades, coinciding with a spike of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

Fact Checking 6 Persistent Science Conspiracy Theories



Again, no science to back up your opinion poll.

Keep trying though. If, as you believe, the proof is there, I'm sure you will find it sometime.

Warming is accelerating? Tough to prove with actual proof. With the current cooling in progress, the warming from 1910 to 1940 was faster than the warming from 1970 to 2000. In between and following these two periods, there was and is cooling. Someone with even the slightest curiosity and the slightest critical thought would question the dogma.

Completely dismissing curiosity and critical thought is a requirement to accept AGW.

I have strange beliefs? My beliefs are based on what nature does. Your beliefs are based on what people you don't know say about things you don't research concerning topics you can't comprehend.

View attachment 67152932
 
Last edited:
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Again, no science to back up your opinion poll.

Keep trying though. If, as you believe, the proof is there, I'm sure you will find it sometime.

View attachment 67152932

Wrong. Just note of those backing the science. You know, those who the work. Not those who are novice at best.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Wrong. Just note of those backing the science. You know, those who the work. Not those who are novice at best.



When you accept an idea as factual, you are committed to it. I'll give you that.

Have you found the science organization that has defined this as a Scientific Theory yet?

Have you found the test defined by any science organization that provides the method by which this notion might be falsified? Without that, this is not even a Scientific Hypothesis.

http://biology.duke.edu/rausher/HYPOTHES.pdf

<snip>
HYPOTHESIS TESTING
There are two ways to "test" the validity of an hypothesis:
1. by attempting to falsify it
2. by attempting to distinguish it from another hypothesis
To falsify an hypothesis, one needs to identify a novel phenomenon that is expected to occur if the hypothesis is true, and either observationally or experimentally determine if that phenomenon actually occurs. If it doesn't, the hypothesis is falsified and we reject it. If it does, we tentatively accept the hypothesis, pending further testing.
To distinguish between two hypotheses, one needs to identify a phenomenon about which the hypotheses make different predictions. Using experiments or observations, that phenomenon is examined. The hypothesis making the correct prediction is accepted as more correct than the other hypothesis.
<snip>
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

When you accept an idea as factual, you are committed to it. I'll give you that.

Have you found the science organization that has defined this as a Scientific Theory yet?

Have you found the test defined by any science organization that provides the method by which this notion might be falsified? Without that, this is not even a Scientific Hypothesis.

http://biology.duke.edu/rausher/HYPOTHES.pdf

<snip>
HYPOTHESIS TESTING
There are two ways to "test" the validity of an hypothesis:
1. by attempting to falsify it
2. by attempting to distinguish it from another hypothesis
To falsify an hypothesis, one needs to identify a novel phenomenon that is expected to occur if the hypothesis is true, and either observationally or experimentally determine if that phenomenon actually occurs. If it doesn't, the hypothesis is falsified and we reject it. If it does, we tentatively accept the hypothesis, pending further testing.
To distinguish between two hypotheses, one needs to identify a phenomenon about which the hypotheses make different predictions. Using experiments or observations, that phenomenon is examined. The hypothesis making the correct prediction is accepted as more correct than the other hypothesis.
<snip>

As I've I already linked many organizations that accept and declare mans role in GW to be accepted scientific theory, you're the one being silly. :coffeepap
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

As I've I already linked many organizations that accept and declare mans role in GW to be accepted scientific theory, you're the one being silly. :coffeepap



You have not. If you know of one, then please favor us now.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

As I've I already linked many organizations that accept and declare mans role in GW to be accepted scientific theory, you're the one being silly. :coffeepap


:lamo I nearly choked on a sip of coffee this morning reading this....Thanks for that...

Code, as well as myself have been asking you for this list throughout the entire thread, and you ignore, or refuse to link it. This revelation of yours here highlights the utter dishonesty of your tact in debate Joe....You have not done what you claim here, but as long as you write it in the thread you never have to...What a joke...And a waste of time it is trying to have a conversation with you.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

:lamo I nearly choked on a sip of coffee this morning reading this....Thanks for that...

Code, as well as myself have been asking you for this list throughout the entire thread, and you ignore, or refuse to link it. This revelation of yours here highlights the utter dishonesty of your tact in debate Joe....You have not done what you claim here, but as long as you write it in the thread you never have to...What a joke...And a waste of time it is trying to have a conversation with you.
The the two of you should read through the thread. It's there. I answered his question and showed him the organizations who said just that. You can be honest or serious if you keep saying you didn't get it.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

The the two of you should read through the thread. It's there. I answered his question and showed him the organizations who said just that. You can be honest or serious if you keep saying you didn't get it.
The stuff you guys link don't solidly answer the questions. Is this one different?

What is the question and what is the linked material. Make sure you quote the part that pertains. I'll tell you why it's a joke.

Don't ask me to go back and find it. After this amount of time, I don't know what you guys have been debating.

Question... Link... Quote.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:4

Agenda 21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read it, and do your own research, but this is probably the clearest sign that the UN is a dangerous to freedom, and needs to be dismantled.

Thanks for the link. Seems GOP is doing a decent job fighting it. I imagine the Libertarian Party is also against it, and it looks like at the local government level awareness is increasing and that Americans do not support it. There really isn't a lot of good things I can say about the UN. I would be happy if it left NYC and headed to the Hague or something. I would also prefer American tax dollars do not support them either.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

The stuff you guys link don't solidly answer the questions. Is this one different?

What is the question and what is the linked material. Make sure you quote the part that pertains. I'll tell you why it's a joke.

Don't ask me to go back and find it. After this amount of time, I don't know what you guys have been debating.

Question... Link... Quote.

The questions was organizations that support man playing a role in GW. I used this one among others earlier:

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

And this one.

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming | Union of Concerned Scientists


You can get an overview here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

The questions was organizations that support man playing a role in GW. I used this one among others earlier:

Climate Change: Consensus

And this one.

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming | Union of Concerned Scientists


You can get an overview here:

Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's it?

"man playing a roll?"

That's a yes. Surely that's not what the argument is about. There has to be more than that. Please elaborate and quote the relavant parts.

I also noticed you linked all that material and didn't quote the relevant parts that support what you mean. That is not cool at all.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

That's it?

"man playing a roll?"

That's a yes. Surely that's not what the argument is about. There has to be more than that. Please elaborate and quote the relavant parts.

I also noticed you linked all that material and didn't quote the relevant parts that support what you mean. That is not cool at all.

It answer the question directly. You guys use the same tactics used by those who claim Bush was behind 9/11. They threw up a lot of weak science as well. As did those who fought the smoking was harmful effort.

but those links answer the question directly. That's all that is needed.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

It answer the question directly. You guys use the same tactics used by those who claim Bush was behind 9/11. They threw up a lot of weak science as well. As did those who fought the smoking was harmful effort.

but those links answer the question directly. That's all that is needed.

I think you're backpedaling.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

I think you're backpedaling.

Not sure where you get that from, but you guys do just throw wild **** out there sometimes.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Not sure where you get that from, but you guys do just throw wild **** out there sometimes.
Because none of us arguing against you have claimed man has no effect. At least that I recall.

Which of these guys this argument has been with, have said we have no effect?
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Because none of us arguing against you have claimed man has no effect. At least that I recall.

Which of these guys this argument has been with, have said we have no effect?

He asked for groups that supported the theory that man plays a role. That's what he got. You can't say man has some effect, but that no one believes they do. That's asinine.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

He asked for groups that supported the theory that man plays a role. That's what he got. You can't say man has some effect, but that no one believes they do. That's asinine.
I think there was more than that. I think he was asking for the specifics you claimed.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

I think there was more than that. I think he was asking for the specifics you claimed.

The specifics I claim is that there is a scientific consensus supported by a majority of scientists and major scientific groups. Not sure why he disputes that, but, that is my claim.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

The specifics I claim is that there is a scientific consensus supported by a majority of scientists and major scientific groups. Not sure why he disputes that, but, that is my claim.
OK, but the 97% is not accurate in the way it's portrayed.

I will agree that the consensus in the Climate sciences is as you say. I will also remind you that consensus is not science.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

OK, but the 97% is not accurate in the way it's portrayed.

I will agree that the consensus in the Climate sciences is as you say. I will also remind you that consensus is not science.

The point is, scientists do science. Not me. Not you. Not political sites. Scientists. So, the best information is from the scientists. Not me. Not you. Not code or j or any novice on any political site. So the scientific consensus represents the science as it is the people who did the science, who reviewed the science, who fully understand the science. Not random novices just answering a poll.

That's the difference.
 
Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

The point is, scientists do science. Not me. Not you. Not political sites. Scientists. So, the best information is from the scientists. Not me. Not you. Not code or j or any novice on any political site. So the scientific consensus represents the science as it is the people who did the science, who reviewed the science, who fully understand the science. Not random novices just answering a poll.

That's the difference.
I can understand your viewpoint. But as one who understands the sciences involved, I say they are full of BS.

I am far from a novice.
 
Back
Top Bottom