daveman
Diamond Member
do what?It's too late now....our children and their children will curse those who could have done something and did nothing.
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.
do what?It's too late now....our children and their children will curse those who could have done something and did nothing.
How am I different than anyone who a hundred years ago said the science is wrong?
I think skepticism is a good thing. I respect and listen to qualified skeptics that have something else to say. The problem is this has been turned into a partisan issue. You refuse to respect and listen to the opinions of qualified people that disagree with you.
I don't know what they think
...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..
it doesn't matter. climate change happens regardless. we should be upgrading our infrastructure and port cities.Shoot out a headline...then try and cover your tracks.
Greenland’s ‘Record Temperature’ denied – the data was wrong
From the “But, but, wait! Our algorithms can adjust for that!” department comes this tale of alarmist woe. Greenland’s all-time record temperature wasn’t a record at all, and it never got above freezing there.
Greenland’s ‘Record Temperature’ denied – the data was wrong
The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..
Why should anyone be finding errors in data you say justifies destroying our economy?I don't know what they think...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..
Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.
If climate science is self-correcting, why does it rely on falsified data?
It doesn't. You just don't understand that our understanding of science evolves over time. There will always be corrections and revisions.
The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..
Science has not become partisan. It doesn't work that way. If there was bullshit floating it would be shot down and buried by other scientists. Scientists the world over are not implicated in a conspiracy to lie to the public. They actually believe this is happening based on what we're capable of understanding so far.
Science has not become partisan.
Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.
It is when Democrats call anyone who questions it deniers and morons. As a famous community organizer once said, the science is settled. Or it was until it changed again.
Exactly. When Einstein submitted the principal of relativity he was way off the charts of thinking of the time. But his science held up to scrutiny and so was accepted.I am very familiar with astronomy via friends who are pros in the field. Here’s rule 1 in astronomy: you conform to current thinking or you don’t get telescope time.What did science say a hundred years ago?
I didn't say scientists are never wrong. I said it's absurd to suggest the majority of the most educated minds on Earth have come to a similar conclusion based on no evidence.
I have zero doubt it’s the same bias being pushed in the climate arena.
Do you think astronomers would come to a consensus without evidence?
Astronomers don't come to a consensus for one thing. In the hard sciences, a thing either is, or it isn't. Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.
It is when Democrats call anyone who questions it deniers and morons. As a famous community organizer once said, the science is settled. Or it was until it changed again.
Al Gore and other Democrats aren't scientists. I think their opinion is about as relevant as yours is.
Al Gore and other Democrats aren't scientists. I think their opinion is about as relevant as yours is.
And there is no consensus on manmade climate change so the science is BS.Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.
A consensus is simply a general agreement. There is a consensus in science that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There are a plethora of things that they've come to a consensus on. Do you people not understand what that word means?
I don't know what they think
I would bet you 100 grand that they believe AGW is happening.
...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..
Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.
Then you better be mocking them
we point out one of their errors
Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.
A consensus is simply a general agreement. There is a consensus in science that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There are a plethora of things that they've come to a consensus on. Do you people not understand what that word means?
This study says man has only a very small part in climate change.I don't know what they think
I would bet you 100 grand that they believe AGW is happening.
...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..
Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.
I am very familiar with astronomy via friends who are pros in the field. Here’s rule 1 in astronomy: you conform to current thinking or you don’t get telescope time.What did science say a hundred years ago?
I didn't say scientists are never wrong. I said it's absurd to suggest the majority of the most educated minds on Earth have come to a similar conclusion based on no evidence.
I have zero doubt it’s the same bias being pushed in the climate arena.
Do you think astronomers would come to a consensus without evidence?
The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..
Science has not become partisan. It doesn't work that way. If there was bullshit floating it would be shot down and buried by other scientists. Scientists the world over are not implicated in a conspiracy to lie to the public. They actually believe this is happening based on what we're capable of understanding so far.