Creationism and Climate Change

[westwall]

The vast majority of the AGW crowd do focus singularly on CO2, and attribute it as the only relevant factor. Do you deny this?

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

Zero emission motor vehicles, high efficiency electrical devices, and sustainable fuel sources don't require we return to the stone age. In fact, just the opposite is true. A society that becomes more efficient is a society that will be more productive.

The problem is none of the alternatives are as efficient as the fossil fuels they wish to replace. Right now the absolute height of electrical vehicles is in racing. The Isle of Man TT is the worlds oldest motorcycle race. The riders make 6 trips around the island at speeds of 130 plus miles per hour. They race at full blast for two laps, then refuel and replace the rear tire. Then two more laps and repeat. The electric bikes can only manage one lap. That's it. And, they're 25 mph slower for the overall speed.

If a EV wanted to race in the 24 Hours of Le Mans, they would have to have multiple cars and multiple batteries. To the point where you could have 9 complete teams, and all the fuel they would need, to support a SINGLE EV race team. You really think that's efficient?

And here's the ultimate goal of the green Luddites....


"It's a message no one wants to hear: To slow down global warming, we'll either have to put the brakes on economic growth or transform the way the world's economies work. That's the implication of an innovative University of Michigan study examining the most likely causes of global warming."


Global warming New research blames economic growth -- ScienceDaily

 

[PredFan]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

 

[Discombobulated]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

 

[Discombobulated]

The vast majority of the AGW crowd do focus singularly on CO2, and attribute it as the only relevant factor. Do you deny this?

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

Zero emission motor vehicles, high efficiency electrical devices, and sustainable fuel sources don't require we return to the stone age. In fact, just the opposite is true. A society that becomes more efficient is a society that will be more productive.

That doesn't matter to people who are only interested in a quick return for their investment.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

^ Motto of the Flat Earth Society

 

[Newby]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You know what? Those who believe in the Biblical story of creation aren't trying to get their hands in my pockets or trying to revert current lifestyle back to what it was 100 years ago. Nor does evolution explain the origin of life, so how you even connect creationism to evolution to begin with is a mystery, they're two separate things.

The AGW worshipers insist on me being taxed and my money given to the 1 percent in the form of 'carbon credits' lol, as if that is somehow going to solve the so called 'warming' issue. Maybe when someone can rationally explain to me how taking my money resolves 'global warming', then I might be willing to listen, but until then, not so much.

 

[Discombobulated]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You know what? Those who believe in the Biblical story of creation aren't trying to get their hands in my pockets or trying to revert current lifestyle back to what it was 100 years ago. Nor does evolution explain the origin of life, so how you even connect creationism to evolution to begin with is a mystery, they're two separate things.

The AGW worshipers insist on me being taxed and my money given to the 1 percent in the form of 'carbon credits' lol, as if that is somehow going to solve the so called 'warming' issue. Maybe when someone can rationally explain to me how taking my money resolves 'global warming', then I might be willing to listen, but until then, not so much.

If you don't accept the fundamentals of science (like evolution) how is anyone supposed to take your opinions about any science seriously?

 

[Newby]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You know what? Those who believe in the Biblical story of creation aren't trying to get their hands in my pockets or trying to revert current lifestyle back to what it was 100 years ago. Nor does evolution explain the origin of life, so how you even connect creationism to evolution to begin with is a mystery, they're two separate things.

The AGW worshipers insist on me being taxed and my money given to the 1 percent in the form of 'carbon credits' lol, as if that is somehow going to solve the so called 'warming' issue. Maybe when someone can rationally explain to me how taking my money resolves 'global warming', then I might be willing to listen, but until then, not so much.

If you don't accept the fundamentals of science (like evolution) how is anyone supposed to take your opinions about any science seriously?

What's been proven with evolution that I don't accept?

Also noted that you addressed nothing in my post! Good job!

 

[westwall]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

Oh, so you're falling back on that old "we must obey what our high priests tell us" mumbo jumbo. I hate to inform you of this, but that's not science, that's witchcraft. Science says that anyone who wishes too, may have your data so that your results can be checked. That is the definition of the scientific method. Climatologists universally NEVER release their data so that it can be checked by others.

No doubt you will then run to the old meme "but only climatologists can understand what they're doing" and I will counter with, if it's good science, any scientist can understand it. But, more importantly, climatology is a "soft" science. Which means I as a PhD in a "hard" science can teach any climatology class there is. A PhD climatologist on the other hand would be totally lost in any classes beyond third year geology (my discipline), and unable to even put together a syllabus for a graduate level class.

So, your vaunted climatologists really aren't that special.

 

[PredFan]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

There is no data, you don't know what you are talking about. If I'm wrong, show me the data.

 

[Flopper]

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

Zero emission motor vehicles, high efficiency electrical devices, and sustainable fuel sources don't require we return to the stone age. In fact, just the opposite is true. A society that becomes more efficient is a society that will be more productive.

The problem is none of the alternatives are as efficient as the fossil fuels they wish to replace. Right now the absolute height of electrical vehicles is in racing. The Isle of Man TT is the worlds oldest motorcycle race. The riders make 6 trips around the island at speeds of 130 plus miles per hour. They race at full blast for two laps, then refuel and replace the rear tire. Then two more laps and repeat. The electric bikes can only manage one lap. That's it. And, they're 25 mph slower for the overall speed.

If a EV wanted to race in the 24 Hours of Le Mans, they would have to have multiple cars and multiple batteries. To the point where you could have 9 complete teams, and all the fuel they would need, to support a SINGLE EV race team. You really think that's efficient?

And here's the ultimate goal of the green Luddites....


"It's a message no one wants to hear: To slow down global warming, we'll either have to put the brakes on economic growth or transform the way the world's economies work. That's the implication of an innovative University of Michigan study examining the most likely causes of global warming."


Global warming New research blames economic growth -- ScienceDaily

Well, if most fossil fuels were used for racing then maybe you would have a point. The fact is the internal combustion engine is incredibly inefficient. Only 18% to 25% of the energy actually makes it to the wheels. Most of the energy, 58% to 62% is expended as heat.

Concern over pollution, global warming, and fuel cost has created a demand for more efficient cars. Hybrids boast an efficiency of about 40%. Electric motor efficiency is 75% to 99%. The Hydrogen Ion efficiency exceeds 75%, However a supporting infrastructure will have to be developed for electric cars and hydrogen ions cars..

Except in special applications, alternative fuel sources have a long ways to go. A number of potential energy sources such as fusion has not been developed for practical use. However, given time, one or more of these alternative fuels sources will replace fossil fuels as a primary fuel source. It may take a hundred years, but it will happen because the problems we have now with global warming, pollution, and geopolitical problems over petroleum are going to continue to increase along with development and improvement of the cost effectiveness of alternative energy sources.

 

[RKMBrown]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You are a fucking moron.

 

[westwall]

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

Zero emission motor vehicles, high efficiency electrical devices, and sustainable fuel sources don't require we return to the stone age. In fact, just the opposite is true. A society that becomes more efficient is a society that will be more productive.

The problem is none of the alternatives are as efficient as the fossil fuels they wish to replace. Right now the absolute height of electrical vehicles is in racing. The Isle of Man TT is the worlds oldest motorcycle race. The riders make 6 trips around the island at speeds of 130 plus miles per hour. They race at full blast for two laps, then refuel and replace the rear tire. Then two more laps and repeat. The electric bikes can only manage one lap. That's it. And, they're 25 mph slower for the overall speed.

If a EV wanted to race in the 24 Hours of Le Mans, they would have to have multiple cars and multiple batteries. To the point where you could have 9 complete teams, and all the fuel they would need, to support a SINGLE EV race team. You really think that's efficient?

And here's the ultimate goal of the green Luddites....


"It's a message no one wants to hear: To slow down global warming, we'll either have to put the brakes on economic growth or transform the way the world's economies work. That's the implication of an innovative University of Michigan study examining the most likely causes of global warming."


Global warming New research blames economic growth -- ScienceDaily

Well, if most fossil fuels were used for racing then maybe you would have a point. The fact is the internal combustion engine is incredibly inefficient. Only 18% to 25% of the energy actually makes it to the wheels. Most of the energy, 58% to 62% is expended as heat.

Concern over pollution, global warming, and fuel cost has created a demand for more efficient cars. Hybrids boast an efficiency of about 40%. Electric motor efficiency is 75% to 99%. The Hydrogen Ion efficiency exceeds 75%, However a supporting infrastructure will have to be developed for electric cars and hydrogen ions cars..

Except in special applications, alternative fuel sources have a long ways to go. A number of potential energy sources such as fusion has not been developed for practical use. However, given time, one or more of these alternative fuels sources will replace fossil fuels as a primary fuel source. It may take a hundred years, but it will happen because the problems we have now with global warming, pollution, and geopolitical problems over petroleum are going to continue to increase along with development and improvement of the cost effectiveness of alternative energy sources.

We have no problem with "global warming" that is a fraud. Pollution IS a problem but none of the "solutions" to control CO2 emissions have the slightest provision to control pollution you just have to pay more to do it. A thinking person would wonder why it was OK to continue to pollute with all the terrible things that will supposedly happen.

 

[Discombobulated]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You are a fucking moron.

Must be one of the 42%.

 

[Discombobulated]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

Oh, so you're falling back on that old "we must obey what our high priests tell us" mumbo jumbo. I hate to inform you of this, but that's not science, that's witchcraft. Science says that anyone who wishes too, may have your data so that your results can be checked. That is the definition of the scientific method. Climatologists universally NEVER release their data so that it can be checked by others.

No doubt you will then run to the old meme "but only climatologists can understand what they're doing" and I will counter with, if it's good science, any scientist can understand it. But, more importantly, climatology is a "soft" science. Which means I as a PhD in a "hard" science can teach any climatology class there is. A PhD climatologist on the other hand would be totally lost in any classes beyond third year geology (my discipline), and unable to even put together a syllabus for a graduate level class.

So, your vaunted climatologists really aren't that special.

You are not a scientist, but thanks for offering your amateur opinions.

 

[westwall]

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

Oh, so you're falling back on that old "we must obey what our high priests tell us" mumbo jumbo. I hate to inform you of this, but that's not science, that's witchcraft. Science says that anyone who wishes too, may have your data so that your results can be checked. That is the definition of the scientific method. Climatologists universally NEVER release their data so that it can be checked by others.

No doubt you will then run to the old meme "but only climatologists can understand what they're doing" and I will counter with, if it's good science, any scientist can understand it. But, more importantly, climatology is a "soft" science. Which means I as a PhD in a "hard" science can teach any climatology class there is. A PhD climatologist on the other hand would be totally lost in any classes beyond third year geology (my discipline), and unable to even put together a syllabus for a graduate level class.

So, your vaunted climatologists really aren't that special.

You are not a scientist, but thanks for offering your amateur opinions.

Wrong again bucko, I earned my PhD in geology from Caltech long before you were born.

 

[PredFan]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You are a fucking moron.

Must be one of the 42%.

I'm still waiting for you to show me the data that says man is causing climate change. What's the hold up? Or were you just talking out of your ignorant ass?

 

[Discombobulated]

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

Do we? Point to any data that shows difinitively, that man is causing the climate to change.

Are you really this slow? As stated already: we have scientists to interpret the data for us........opinions don't matter.

Oh, so you're falling back on that old "we must obey what our high priests tell us" mumbo jumbo. I hate to inform you of this, but that's not science, that's witchcraft. Science says that anyone who wishes too, may have your data so that your results can be checked. That is the definition of the scientific method. Climatologists universally NEVER release their data so that it can be checked by others.

No doubt you will then run to the old meme "but only climatologists can understand what they're doing" and I will counter with, if it's good science, any scientist can understand it. But, more importantly, climatology is a "soft" science. Which means I as a PhD in a "hard" science can teach any climatology class there is. A PhD climatologist on the other hand would be totally lost in any classes beyond third year geology (my discipline), and unable to even put together a syllabus for a graduate level class.

So, your vaunted climatologists really aren't that special.

You are not a scientist, but thanks for offering your amateur opinions.

Wrong again bucko, I earned my PhD in geology from Caltech long before you were born.

Next time I have a geology question I'll ask a climate scientist.

 

[RKMBrown]

Next time I have a geology question I'll ask a climate scientist.

Yeah cause we all know scientists can only have experience in one field of study.

 

[Discombobulated]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

You are a fucking moron.

Must be one of the 42%.

I'm still waiting for you to show me the data that says man is causing climate change. What's the hold up? Or were you just talking out of your ignorant ass?

As though scientific information of any kind would have significance for you.