How do we Know Human are Causing Climate Change?

[ding]

That's weird. You sounded so sure of what I believed.

Given that you have yet to go on record it can be anything I infer from your criticisms. Such as you seem like you are making the argument of a fundie. You have given your power to me.

 

[ding]

I should be charging for this.

 

[ding]

3-2-1....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Given that you have yet to go on record it can be anything I infer from your criticisms. Such as you seem like you are making the argument of a fundie. You have given your power to me.

And then I laughed.

DURR

 

[Colin norris]

I looked through them all, and there is nothing there that could be construed in any way to be observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....as with all warmest propaganda, there are some observations, and great big honking, handwaving hysterical assumptions hung on those observations...nothing like actual evidence to support the claims......you have to be willing to simply believe...

Of course if you believe there is observed, measured evidence there that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability, by all means cut and paste it here, or point it out and I will be happy to go look.

As if you're an expert and the world hangs in every word you utter.

 

[ding]

And then I laughed.

DURR

Me too. This has been fun.

 

[abu afak]

I don't believe you know what you believe as you seem to be arguing against punctuated equillibrium and natural selection. Are you a fundie per chance? Tell you what, have a think and get back to me when you know what you believe. Fair enough?

Actually it's YOU who's the Fundie (according to your god/designer posts in the Religion and Sci sections) and believes in a designer not real evolution.
ergo you also abuse Punctuated Equilibrium as per my signature of four years elaborates just below.
`

 

[ding]

Actually it's YOU who's the Fundie (according to your god/designer posts in the Religion and Sci sections) and believes in a designer not real evolution.
ergo you also abuse Punctuated Equilibrium as per my signature of four years elaborates just below.
`

You must be confusing me for someone else, unlike Todd I have clearly stated my beliefs, so there is no room for doubt.

With respect to speciation, punctuated equilibrium matches the observations of the fossil record where Darwinism doesn't. Stop being a DarwinFundie.

 

[Crick]

Punctuated equilibrium matches the record better than non-punctuated equilibrium. Both operate on Darwinian evolution.

 

[ding]

Punctuated equilibrium matches the record better than non-punctuated equilibrium. Both operate on Darwinian evolution.

Do they really though? Or does natural selection just operate on an existing species and not speciation which is based upon genetic mutations?

 

[Crick]

You're going to have to try a little bit harder to form a meaningful question. All speciation is caused by genetic mutation. Natural selection operates on all life. So, try again to say whatever it was you were trying to say.

 

[ding]

You're going to have to try a little bit harder to form a meaningful question. All speciation is caused by genetic mutation. Natural selection operates on all life. So, try again to say whatever it was you were trying to say.

Actually I don't. You just admitted that natural selection doesn't drive speciation, genetic mutations do. That's the basis for punctuated equilibrium.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Actually I don't. You just admitted that natural selection doesn't drive speciation, genetic mutations do. That's the basis for punctuated equilibrium.

Natural selection doesn't work when mutations are involved?

 

[ding]

Natural selection doesn't work when mutations are involved?

Natural selection - which is effectively based upon breeding - is always going on but it is not the cause of genetic mutation.

 

[abu afak]

Natural selection - which is effectively based upon breeding - is always going on but it is not the cause of genetic mutation.

Once Again your claims show a complete MISunderstanding of the process.
You're so G-D stupid one thinks it's trolling/Thread-*******.
Hard to tell when it not the latter pastime due to your obnoxious little nature.

NS is not "the cause of mutation," the reverse tho is part of the case: ongoing mutations gives natural selection more and larger choices than just genetic drift in the evolution of both subspecies and species.

You are such a Contrary and confused godist.
One wonders if your whacked god ideas are the basis fort your anti-AGW position since you probably feel the big guy is controlling it's pre-"designed" and self-correcting,
The more you post, the more I figure out your issues. (beside being a little heel-nipping/last-wording prlck)
`
`

 

[ding]

Once Again your claims show a complete MISunderstanding of the process.
You're so G-D stupid one thinks it's trolling/Thread-*******.
Hard to tell when it not the latter pastime due to your obnoxious little nature.

NS is not "the cause of mutation," the reverse tho is part of the case: ongoing mutations gives natural selection more and larger choices than just genetic drift in the evolution of both subspecies and species.

You are such a Contrary and confused godist.
One wonders if your whacked god ideas are the basis fort your anti-AGW position since you probably feel the big guy is controlling it's pre-"designed" and self-correcting,
The more you post, the more I figure out your issues. (beside being a little heel-nipping/last-wording prlck)
`
`

You are upset. Try eating a snickers.

 

[ding]

NS is not "the cause of mutation

I'm glad you agreed with me.

 

[abu afak]

I'm glad you agreed with me.

And corrected your wild misunderstanding again.
`

 

[ding]

And corrected your wild misunderstanding again.

I don't see how. Natural selection - which is effectively based upon breeding - is always going on but it is not the cause of genetic mutation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Natural selection - which is effectively based upon breeding - is always going on but it is not the cause of genetic mutation.

Who said natural selection causes mutation?
When a mutation occurs, is it subject to natural selection?