Vegasgiants
Silver Member
- Apr 16, 2022
- 2,469
- 462
- 98
- Banned
- #381
I mean to tell you they are irrelevant
Now its caused by AGW
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
I mean to tell you they are irrelevant
I and I explained why an how it does.Consensus doesn’t govern science. If I repeat it SEVEN TIMES!!! maybe you’ll begin to grasp that you’re wrong. But I’m not optimistic.
I honestly suggest you read something with (for once) an open mind: Michael Crichton explains why there is 'no such thing as consensus science' | American Enterprise Institute - AEI
“Those who know that the consensus of many centuries has sanctioned the conception that the earth remains at rest in the middle of the heavens as its center, would, I reflected, regard it as an insane pronouncement if I made the opposite assertion that the earth moves.” -Nicolaus CopernicusI bet you think Jurassic park was real. Lol
HAHAHAHAI bet you think cloning is just science fiction. Note: I said cloning not the cloning of dinosaurs. But for that matter, I’ll bet you rule out even the possibility of such scientific progress.
Reality refutes your assertion. Consensus clearly does not govern science.I and I explained why an how it does.
NO rebuttal.
Now embarrassed at being Mum/Not taken issue/answerLess for pages, and pressed/squeezed by me, you had to go googling.
But of course it does not refute my explanation.
`
Incorrect. The same forces that caused those climate fluctuations still exist today.I mean to tell you they are irrelevant
Now its caused by AGW
The scientific community disagrees with youIncorrect. The same forces that caused those climate fluctuations still exist today.
They get paid to do that. If they said anything else they wouldn't have a job.The scientific community disagrees with you
Good. Glad they are doing their jobThey get paid to do that. If they said anything else they wouldn't have a job.
I posted/elaborated indisputable Reality.Reality refutes your assertion. Consensus clearly does not govern science.
Wrong. I shared the contention of a scientist (because I consider medical doctors to be scientists) and that is fact. That he shared his contention with a think tank doesn’t change its value at all.I posted/elaborated indisputable Reality.
You posted one man's wrong [politica] opinion from a political think tank.
LOL
`
Me too because once the colder temperatures prove they were wrong they will come out of the woodwork in droves saying they never really believed any of it and were coerced into it.Good. Glad they are doing their job
He was an MD.
Reality refutes your assertion. Consensus clearly does not govern science.
Exactly.They get paid to do that. If they said anything else they wouldn't have a job.
Wrong. I shared the contention of a scientist (because I consider medical doctors to be scientists) and that is fact. That he shared his contention with a think tank doesn’t change its value at all.
You are desperately clinging to a naive and erroneous belief. As many have already advised you, science is not governed by consensus. Never has been and never will be. And that’s a very good thing.
Exactly. He is guzzling down their Kool-Aid and doesn't even realize how big of a dupe that makes him.... all he can say is but but but consensus. Sad.He is deliberately ignoring the evidence he apparently thinks there was no oscillating temperature changes before the magic year 1950 since he is a warmist/alarmist KOOK.
If the planet being 2C cooler than the past with 120 ppm more CO2 won't convince them then nothing will except maybe a prolonged period of cold temperatures.Exactly.
The question that all the warmers have never answered follows....
What would all the climate "scientists' do next week, if they came out today and said: "Sorry, we got it all wrong. There's really nothing to worry about. Our bad."?
*crickets*