🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

How do we Know Human are Causing Climate Change?

Sure, you can make up new meanings if you like, but good luck getting anyone to speak your new language using the same old words.
Phonogenic Talk From Photogenic Heads

The ignorant and confused media change meanings and grammar willy-nilly. Leaving their brains on the remote, the captive listeners, no matter where on the specious spectrum, parrot the pushy lingo of the On-Air AirHeads.

"I don't believe a word they say but I'll adopt the way they said it."
 
Last edited:
VegNews
New Study Finds a Surprising Health Benefit of Eating Peanuts
New research finds vascular health benefits of eating a daily serving of peanuts and peanut butter.
.2 days ago
.
2 days ago
Tech Explorist
A new mRNA treatment could completely cure a peanut allergy
UCLA scientists have developed a nanoparticle that delivers mRNA to liver cells in order to teach the immune system to tolerate peanut...
.
1 day ago
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
Peanuts May Pack a Punch for Women's Health
Peanuts are a protein-packed legume that may have a new superpower in relieving menopause symptoms. Research chemist Ondulla Toomer tells us...
.
2 weeks ago
What to Expect
Food Allergies in Babies — Common Reactions and How to Treat Them
Here's when and how to introduce your child to foods that can cause allergies — and what to do if your baby or toddler has a food allergy.
.
4 days ago
New Food magazine
Could eating peanuts improve vascular health?
Eating peanuts and peanut butter could have a beneficial impact on vascular health in young and healthy people, study claims.
.
1 week ago
FoodNavigator-USA
Most peanut butter would not qualify for 'healthy' claim under FDA's new proposed rule, says Peanut Federation
Nutrient-rich foods including peanut butter and dried tart cherries with low levels of added sugars would not meet new criteria proposed by...
.
Dec 20, 2022
Medical Xpress
Study: Peanut allergies could dramatically fall if babies weaned early on peanut products
Peanut allergy could plummet by 77 percent if peanut products were added to all babies' diets at four to six months of age, according to new...
.
3 weeks ago
KVIA
A new study suggests babies should be given peanut products between 4 and 6 months old
EL PASO, Texas (KVIA) -- Peanut allergy is the second most common food allergy in children and is on the increase. it occurs in about 1 in...
1 week ago
Medical News Today
A handful of peanuts, a teaspoon of spices a day may help gut health
Adding a handful of peanuts and a teaspoon of herbs and spices to one's diet could help improve gut health in 4–6 weeks, according to two...
Dec 7, 2022


`
In your eating peanuts.....Global warming is being created because humans eat cows. Cow farts create a lot of CO2.

The deal with the cows is simple: when they burp and fart, they're burping and farting out methane. According to the United Nations, as reported by NBC News, these burps and farts contribute to at least four percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. On a greater level, the United Nations further reports that the livestock industry is responsible for around 18 percent of greenhouse gases contributing to global warming.


They contain high amounts of protein, fiber and healthy carbs, as well as minerals such as iron, copper and manganese. Because of their high fiber content, they can cause bloating in sensitive individuals. These sugars may contribute to excessive gas production and bloating. Secondly, why do peanuts make me burp?

Do Peanuts Cause Gas And Bloating - HealthyGutClub.com


www.healthygutclub.net/do-peanuts-cause-gas-and-bloating/



So again, you morons dont follow the science but just parrot what your marxist masters tell you to say. 7 billion people farting and belching because they are eating peanuts is a lot more than all the cows farting and belching. By the way, when humans eat meat, the by product of that protein is shit, which can be used as fertilizer.
 
In your eating peanuts.....Global warming is being created because humans eat cows. Cow farts create a lot of CO2.




They contain high amounts of protein, fiber and healthy carbs, as well as minerals such as iron, copper and manganese. Because of their high fiber content, they can cause bloating in sensitive individuals. These sugars may contribute to excessive gas production and bloating. Secondly, why do peanuts make me burp?

Do Peanuts Cause Gas And Bloating - HealthyGutClub.com


www.healthygutclub.net/do-peanuts-cause-gas-and-bloating/



So again, you morons dont follow the science but just parrot what your marxist masters tell you to say. 7 billion people farting and belching because they are eating peanuts is a lot more than all the cows farting and belching. By the way, when humans eat meat, the by product of that protein is shit, which can be used as fertilizer.


So NO REAL answer to my pointing out there were many things found out about the Peanut since 40 years ago, and even 40 days ago.
(Just as there has been about AGW!)

Your example was Refuted 100% you Low IQ MAGAt POS.

`
 
Last edited:
That day came and went long ago.
That day has come and gone.
Oh, the good old days.
Goils were goils.
Men were men.
Those were the days!
Wild Pitches and Passed Balls

I notice that the jockstrap-sniffing sports announcers don't know the past participle perfective and subjunctive usage either. So, instead of saying, "If he had caught that ball, he would have run for a touchdown," they came up with the lame and confusing "He catches that ball; he runs for a touchdown."
 
B Students Jealous of A Students

Among the bitter nerds who become climatologists because the hard sciences require too much thinking, likely means "we'd like it to be."

Scientific method example: Failure to toast​

Let's build some intuition for the scientific method by applying its steps to a practical problem from everyday life.

1. Make an observation.​

Let's suppose that you get two slices of bread, put them into the toaster, and press the button. However, your bread does not toast.

1. Observation: the toaster won't toast.

  1. Observation: the toaster won't toast.

2. Ask a question.​

Why didn't my bread get toasted?

2. Question: Why won't my toaster toast?

  1. Question: Why won't my toaster toast?

3. Propose a hypothesis.​

A hypothesis is a potential answer to the question, one that can somehow be tested. For example, our hypothesis in this case could be that the toast didn't toast because the electrical outlet is broken.

3. Hypothesis: Maybe the outlet is broken.

  1. Hypothesis: Maybe the outlet is broken.
This hypothesis is not necessarily the right explanation. Instead, it's a possible explanation that we can test to see if it is likely correct, or if we need to make a new hypothesis.
[Can any explanation count as a hypothesis?]
[Is a hypothesis a theory?]

4. Make predictions.​

A prediction is an outcome we'd expect to see if the hypothesis is correct. In this case, we might predict that if the electrical outlet is broken, then plugging the toaster into a different outlet should fix the problem.

4. Prediction: If I plug the toaster into a different outlet, then it will toast the bread.

  1. Prediction: If I plug the toaster into a different outlet, then it will toast the bread.

5. Test the predictions.​

To test the hypothesis, we need to make an observation or perform an experiment associated with the prediction. For instance, in this case, we would plug the toaster into a different outlet and see if it toasts.

5. Test of prediction: Plug the toaster into a different outlet and try again.

  1. Test of prediction: Plug the toaster into a different outlet and try again.
  • If the toaster does toast, then the hypothesis is supported—likely correct.
  • If the toaster doesn't toast, then the hypothesis is not supported—likely wrong.
The results of a test may either support or contradict—oppose—a hypothesis. Results that support a hypothesis can't conclusively prove that it's correct, but they do mean it's likely to be correct. On the other hand, if results contradict a hypothesis, that hypothesis is probably not correct. Unless there was a flaw in the test—a possibility we should always consider—a contradictory result means that we can discard the hypothesis and look for a new one.
[More about hypotheses, proof, and disproof]

6. Iterate.​

The last step of the scientific method is to reflect on our results and use them to guide our next steps.

[IMG alt="And the result is:

Left panel: My bread toasts! Hypothesis is supported.
Right panel: My bread still won't toast. Hypothesis is not supported.

6. Iteration time!

Left panel (in case of hypothesis being supported): But what is actually wrong with the outlet?
Right panel (in case of hypothesis not being supported): Hmm...maybe there is a broken wire in the toaster."]https://cdn.kastatic.org/ka-perseus-images/f48c1e8ff077decb6d8adafa35d665d7df815b87.png[/IMG]
And the result is:
Left panel: My bread toasts! Hypothesis is supported. Right panel: My bread still won't toast. Hypothesis is not supported.
  1. Iteration time!
Left panel (in case of hypothesis being supported): But what is actually wrong with the outlet? Right panel (in case of hypothesis not being supported): Hmm...maybe there is a broken wire in the toaster.
  • If the hypothesis was supported, we might do additional tests to confirm it, or revise it to be more specific. For instance, we might investigate why the outlet is broken.


 
Ibid

Why is it that we can't conclusively prove a hypothesis? And can we actually disprove a hypothesis?
One key distinction here is between what's logically possible and what's practically possible. Logically speaking, it's impossible to prove a hypothesis, but possible to disprove one. Practically speaking, it's challenging to either prove or disprove a hypothesis beyond the slightest doubt.

Logical possibility​

As an example, suppose we have the hypothesis that all apples are red, and we test this hypothesis by examining a group of ten apples and seeing what color they are. If all ten apples are red, our hypothesis is supported, but it's not proven: if we looked at more apples, some of them might turn out to be green. On the other hand, if one of our ten apples is green, we have—in a world of perfect information and no error—disproven our hypothesis.

Practical possibility​

Practically speaking—"in real life"—it's still impossible to prove a hypothesis since it's not even logically possible to prove a hypothesis. However, in real life scenarios, it also becomes difficult to disprove a hypothesis beyond any imaginable doubt.
For example, suppose that we examine our apples in the scenario above and find that one of them is green. If the green apple is bona fide, the hypothesis cannot be correct. However, it's possible that the apple is not actually green, in the sense we care about, and that we classified it as a green apple due to an error or a wrong assumption. For example, perhaps the green apple is a decorative apple that someone painted. Or maybe it's a red apple covered with green mold, which makes it look green on first examination.

Building a body of evidence​

In a sense, we can never conclusively disprove the hypothesis that all apples are red in the real world because we can't exclude the tiny possibility of some kind of error, bad assumption, or bizarre coincidence.
However, suppose that we carefully investigate every alternative explanation we can think of—painted apples, moldy apples, etc.—and don't find support for any of them. In addition, let's say we repeat our experiment by looking at a much larger number of apples, and we find a consistent fraction of green ones. Additionally, people on neighboring farms report that they routinely see green apples as well.
In this case, although our hypothesis that all apples are red may not be disproven beyond all imaginable doubt, it is so strongly contradicted as to be effectively disproven. In other words, no one is likely to consider it correct, design experiments around it, or base assumptions on it.
 

Scientific method example: Failure to toast​

Let's build some intuition for the scientific method by applying its steps to a practical problem from everyday life.

1. Make an observation.​

Let's suppose that you get two slices of bread, put them into the toaster, and press the button. However, your bread does not toast.

1. Observation: the toaster won't toast.'t toast.

  1. Observation: the toaster won't toast.

2. Ask a question.​

Why didn't my bread get toasted?

2. Question: Why won't my toaster toast?'t my toaster toast?

  1. Question: Why won't my toaster toast?

3. Propose a hypothesis.​

A hypothesis is a potential answer to the question, one that can somehow be tested. For example, our hypothesis in this case could be that the toast didn't toast because the electrical outlet is broken.

3. Hypothesis: Maybe the outlet is broken.

  1. Hypothesis: Maybe the outlet is broken.
This hypothesis is not necessarily the right explanation. Instead, it's a possible explanation that we can test to see if it is likely correct, or if we need to make a new hypothesis.
[Can any explanation count as a hypothesis?]
[Is a hypothesis a theory?]

4. Make predictions.​

A prediction is an outcome we'd expect to see if the hypothesis is correct. In this case, we might predict that if the electrical outlet is broken, then plugging the toaster into a different outlet should fix the problem.

4. Prediction: If I plug the toaster into a different outlet, then it will toast the bread.

  1. Prediction: If I plug the toaster into a different outlet, then it will toast the bread.

5. Test the predictions.​

To test the hypothesis, we need to make an observation or perform an experiment associated with the prediction. For instance, in this case, we would plug the toaster into a different outlet and see if it toasts.

5. Test of prediction: Plug the toaster into a different outlet and try again.

  1. Test of prediction: Plug the toaster into a different outlet and try again.
  • If the toaster does toast, then the hypothesis is supported—likely correct.
  • If the toaster doesn't toast, then the hypothesis is not supported—likely wrong.
The results of a test may either support or contradict—oppose—a hypothesis. Results that support a hypothesis can't conclusively prove that it's correct, but they do mean it's likely to be correct. On the other hand, if results contradict a hypothesis, that hypothesis is probably not correct. Unless there was a flaw in the test—a possibility we should always consider—a contradictory result means that we can discard the hypothesis and look for a new one.
[More about hypotheses, proof, and disproof]

6. Iterate.​

The last step of the scientific method is to reflect on our results and use them to guide our next steps.

[IMG alt="And the result is:

Left panel: My bread toasts! Hypothesis is supported.
Right panel: My bread still won't toast. Hypothesis is not supported.

6. Iteration time!

Left panel (in case of hypothesis being supported): But what is actually wrong with the outlet?
Right panel (in case of hypothesis not being supported): Hmm...maybe there is a broken wire in the toaster."]https://cdn.kastatic.org/ka-perseus-images/f48c1e8ff077decb6d8adafa35d665d7df815b87.png[/IMG]
And the result is:
Left panel: My bread toasts! Hypothesis is supported. Right panel: My bread still won't toast. Hypothesis is not supported.
  1. Iteration time!
Left panel (in case of hypothesis being supported): But what is actually wrong with the outlet? Right panel (in case of hypothesis not being supported): Hmm...maybe there is a broken wire in the toaster.
  • If the hypothesis was supported, we might do additional tests to confirm it, or revise it to be more specific. For instance, we might investigate why the outlet is broken.


How is it that with Global Warming year after year, and the ice caps are supposed to melt (Above 32 degrees) where does the sub zero polar vortex get is cold air from? you guys can put up bull shit links all you want, but where does the cold air come from?

+32° F
  • According to 2 sources



To get any ice to melt, would need to raise the average daily temperature from -58 to +32° F (melting point of ice), plus another ~10° F = a total warming of +100°F."

Fact check: Antarctica ice s…

usatoday.com
At temperatures above 32 ° F (0 ° C), pure water ice melts and changes state from a solid to a liquid (water); 32 ° F (0 ° C) is the melting point.

Explore - All About Ice - That'…

lpi.usra.edu


 
How is it that with Global Warming year after year, and the ice caps are supposed to melt (Above 32 degrees) where does the sub zero polar vortex get is cold air from? you guys can put up bull shit links all you want, but where does the cold air come from?
Huh?/WTF?

How is it you are SO FUKKING STUPID?
No one says the Poles go Above 32 even a significant part of the year, But NEVER all or even most of it. (tho the North pole may/has breached that for periods in it's spring/summer and shrink significantly).
GW is average Temp over the globe.

You are WAY, WAY, WAY, Too stupid to even debate.


`
 
Last edited:
This hypothesis is not necessarily the right explanation. Instead, it's a possible explanation that we can test to see if it is likely correct, or if we need to make a new hypothesis.
And if the plug wasn't all the way plugged in, then your hypothesis is wrong.
 
Huh?/WTF?

How is it you are SO FUKKING STUPID?
No one says the Poles go Above 32 even PART of the year, much less all of it. (tho parts may reach that for brief periods).
GW is average Temp over the globe.

You are WAY, WAY, WAY, Too stupid to even debate.


`
Holy fk, can't make this shit up. I can't resist. Just a quick question if the temperature where the ice is is never over 32 degrees, how does it melt because the rest of the globe is warm?
 
Like I said, please get back to me when you have passed Remedial Basic Science.
oh for fk sake. The internet has dictionaries, you could look it up and note that it isn't necessarily so is the meaning


if something is likely, it will probably happen or is expected: LOL

I love this one

Children from an underprivileged family background are statistically more likely to become involved in crime.

Does this mean all underprivileged children commit crimes? For fk sake you asswipe.
 
oh for fk sake. The internet has dictionaries, you could look it up and note that it isn't necessarily so is the meaning


if something is likely, it will probably happen or is expected: LOL

I love this one

Children from an underprivileged family background are statistically more likely to become involved in crime.

Does this mean all underprivileged children commit crimes? For fk sake you asswipe.

Meaning of probable in English​

probable
adjective

US
likely to be true or likely to happen:
The probable cause of death was heart failure.
An election in June seems increasingly probable.
[ + that ] It is probable that stock prices will fall even more.
Compare
possible (NOT CERTAIN)
 
Huh?/WTF?

How is it you are SO FUKKING STUPID?
No one says the Poles go Above 32 even a significant part of the year, But NEVER all or even most of it. (tho the North pole may/has breached that for periods in it's spring/summer and shrink significantly).
GW is average Temp over the globe.

You are WAY, WAY, WAY, Too stupid to even debate.


`
How can you have an average temp all over the globe when there arent sensors all over the globe or many of those sensors are on a hot tin roof or asphalt sidewalk?


Oh and when it comes to average temps they never add in the coldest periods of that year, because then nothing would change. Without the fear, the money goes away, and the "Scientists" might have to work for a living...
 
How can you have an average temp all over the globe when there arent sensors all over the globe or many of those sensors are on a hot tin roof or asphalt sidewalk?


Oh and when it comes to average temps they never add in the coldest periods of that year, because then nothing would change. Without the fear, the money goes away, and the "Scientists" might have to work for a living...
There ARE thermometers all over the Globe.
You are a RAGING 70 IQ IDIOT who thought the poles should melt/have already melted.
WTF!
WTF
WTF
and that somehow you came up the "Fact" or "Claim" that the polls were Over 32.
You do NOT Know the avg Temp in Miami isn't the same Temp as the South Pole or Alaska?

WTF
WTF
WTF
TOO STUPID TO DEBATE.
TOO STUPID TO DEBATE.
TOO STUPID TO DEBATE.

And there are thermometers all over the Globe, OF COURSE YOU BRAIN DAMAGED Clown.


NASA
""Over the past 140 years, we’ve literally gone from making some temperature measurements by hand to using sophisticated satellite technology. Today’s temperature data come from many sources, including more than 32,000 land weather stations, weather balloons, radar, ships and buoys, satellites, and volunteer weather watchers.""


TOO STUPID TO DEBATE
TOO STUPID TO DEBATE.
`
 
Last edited:
And if the plug wasn't all the way plugged in, then your hypothesis is wrong.
Now you're starting to get it.

The problem wasn't my knowledge of the definition of these terms, it was been that you did not understand why they were being used.
 
I'd check the breaker or ground fault on the outlet first. Make sure the toast slider was pushed all the way down. Then unplug the toaster and plug a test light into the same outlet to see if it worked rather risk blowing out another outlet with a potentially shorted toaster.
 
So again, you morons dont follow the science but just parrot what your marxist masters tell you to say. 7 billion people farting and belching because they are eating peanuts is a lot more than all the cows farting and belching. By the way, when humans eat meat, the by product of that protein is shit, which can be used as fertilizer.
Exactly, as I had already stated - the Dino's went extinct due to global warming, caused by excessive farting and shitting, at average at a 100 times more then a human.
And latest scientific hypothetical studies have revealed (books not published yet) that around 25 billion Dino's populated the Earth, just before they went extinct.
 

Forum List

Back
Top