 willhelm says: It seems a consensus is starting to form. whether accurate or not (and clearly not) its not like global warming is a new subject, frickin carl sagan has talked bout it, but to expect to pass legislation based on a weather report 50 years into the future is ridiculous, how many people trust tomorrow's weather report let alone on from so far ahead of today. they handled that the wrong way if they wanted congress to take it seriously, and not leave as much tumble screws as they did. How do a couple of scientists amount to a consensus? Egil asks a great question, wilhelm. I'm curious about that too. Additionally, I've got to say that I found the very mainstream sponsors on the page to be very encouraging as to the reliability of the publication NewsMax. Click to Lose 25 lbs by Sept 1 - FREE trial of Hoodia Egils commented about a "consensus". This gets thrown up constantly by the "pro human driven climate change theory brigade". The simple fact is that the scientific process isn't about consensus. A majority of scientists may believe in a particular hypotheses but this doesn't make it true. Science is about formulating hypotheses & then testing them. It isn't about a show of hands with the majority vote taking the day. History has plenty of examples of minority scientific hypotheses ultimately being proven against overwhelming opposition. Egil1313, I was being sarcastic. In reality, for every SINGLE name of a scientist that agrees with the anthropogenic global warming, I can give you 10 that do not. For every supposed "fact" you can give me showing why man is causing global warming, I can show you that it is absurd and give you an opposing fact. The fact of the matter is where there is "consensus", there IS NO science. Science is not about consensus. It is about evidence and testing. Computer models that predict global warming are grossly inadequate. The entire Solar System seems to be warming. The Earth has experienced warming to a much more dramatic degree in the past. CO2 increases in the atmosphere following warming - ... ...also obliquity of the Earth. Willie, as to your supposition that CO2 increases follow warming, I have presented evidence to you that it is a self-propogating cycle. You also contend that the whole solar system is warming, and I provided you with proof that the planet that is warming, Mars, is warming due to the huge amount of dust that is being picked up causing a mini-greenhouse effect. If you have info on the soar system, as a whole, warming, I'd be more than interested in taking a peek. Until then, I'll rely on the chemistry that I know, and the greenhouse effect here. Also, Why does most of your 'data' come from blogs and notorious sites like heartland.org? You need to find a few real science sites to back your claim if you expect anyone to take you seriously  Wow. That's a lot of clips. I take it this is an obsession. I browsed trough the first page or so, but didn't see one on the whole solar system warming. Perhaps you could recall the name of it or something. Additionally, I didn't see any from a real science sight backing your position. Perhaps you could lead me in the right direction. In fact you're a highly prolific clipper. You must spend half the day clipping stuff! I did enjoy the toothpaste one. names of the 100's of scientists you claim please? Also include credentials. Thanks I refer you to my above link. Now, you name 10. 10 that agree with Global Warming, that is. Please, you do not need to provide credentials. I will certainly investigate the validity of their claims. ...Antropogenic Global warming that is. All scientists agree the Earth is warming. Please do not include academies, and partisan groups. Please give me some names. |
View the Top Clips from August 7, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||
|
|
|||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||
