RE: Gop trying to break science education again

RE: Gop trying to break science education again (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

GotSteel -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 2:57:31 PM)
A couple of things while we're talking about Moore: quote: ORIGINAL: http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center/news-releases/greenpeace-statement-on-patric/ Patrick Moore often misrepresents himself in the media as an environmental “expert” or even an “environmentalist,” while offering anti-environmental opinions on a wide range of issues and taking a distinctly anti-environmental stance. He also exploits long-gone ties with Greenpeace to sell himself as a speaker and pro-corporate spokesperson, usually taking positions that Greenpeace opposes. quote: ORIGINAL: http://web.archive.org/web/20060207170119/http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060113/BUSINESS11/601130327/1071 Global warming and nuclear energy are good and the way to save forests is to use more wood. That was the message delivered to a biotechnology industry gathering yesterday in Waikiki. However, it wasn't the message that was unconventional, but the messenger — Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore. That's right he's a corporate shill who's actively in favor of global warming.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 3:43:14 PM)
Funny how people like to use terms like "denialists" when they know that it isn't true...or only half-true. Most people that are skeptical about global warming/climate change are skeptics. They do not deny climate change, they are skeptical as to the degree of human involvement and skeptical of the danger it poses and the rate at which it is claimed to be happening. Its funny how, when one of the best-known environmentalist, makes a statement that goes against the UCS and other groups, a statement is quickly made about how he's not a scientist. Did you see anyone on here claiming he is? Yet, as long as his views and his work go along with the environmentalists' goals, nothing is said. As has been shown on the boards before, there are esteemed scientists on both sides. For Neil DeGrasse Tyson, there is Nicola Scaffeta. Which leads to the statement about cherry-picking: John Cook, founder of SkepticalScience, and several colleagues published a paper stating that there is, in 97%of the papers that expressed an opinion, an endorsement of the position that human activity causes global warming. But, the question surveyed had NOTHING to do with the issues of contention between alarmists and skeptics). The question surveyed asked simply "whether humans had caused some global warming". The question is meaningless because most skeptics, as stated earlier, believe that to be true. The debate comes into play when you begin to address how much, the effects, and the pace. "Investigative journalists at Popular Tehnology looked into precisely which papers were classified within Cook's asserted 97%. The investigative journalists found Cook and his colleagues strikingly classified papers by such prominent, vigorous skeptics as Willie Soon, Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir Shaviv, Nils Axel-Morner and Alan Carlin as supporting the 97% concensus." ( The rest of the article is in the May 39, 2013 edition of Forbes Magazine. Google: global warming alarmists caught doctoring 97% consensus ).

GotSteel -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 5:06:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Funny how people like to use terms like "denialists" when they know that it isn't true...or only half-true. Most people that are skeptical about global warming/climate change are skeptics. They do not deny climate change, they are skeptical as to the degree of human involvement and skeptical of the danger it poses and the rate at which it is claimed to be happening. As a rational skeptic I can assure you that what you've got going over there is NOT skepticism.

thompsonx -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 5:13:36 PM)
ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Funny how people like to use terms like "denialists" when they know that it isn't true...or only half-true. Most people that are skeptical about global warming/climate change are skeptics. They do not deny climate change, they are skeptical as to the degree of human involvement and skeptical of the danger it poses and the rate at which it is claimed to be happening. I would go a step further and point out that you have your head up your ass so far you could not see daylight with a mother fucking periscope.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 5:23:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Funny how people like to use terms like "denialists" when they know that it isn't true...or only half-true. Most people that are skeptical about global warming/climate change are skeptics. They do not deny climate change, they are skeptical as to the degree of human involvement and skeptical of the danger it poses and the rate at which it is claimed to be happening. As a rational skeptic I can assure you that what you've got going over there is NOT skepticism. since we all define ourselves, call yourself what you wish. Since I come down on the side of the skeptics on the other side, I'll go with that.

subrosaDom -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 5:28:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Funny how people like to use terms like "denialists" when they know that it isn't true...or only half-true. Most people that are skeptical about global warming/climate change are skeptics. They do not deny climate change, they are skeptical as to the degree of human involvement and skeptical of the danger it poses and the rate at which it is claimed to be happening. I would go a step further and point out that you have your head up your ass so far you could not see daylight with a mother fucking periscope. If you put your head far enough up your ass eventually you shall pass through the alimentary canal and ultimately you will see daylight again with a renewed appreciation of an unobstructed view.

thompsonx -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 5:34:40 PM)
ORIGINAL: subrosaDom If you put your head far enough up your ass eventually you shall pass through the alimentary canal and ultimately you will see daylight again with a renewed appreciation of an unobstructed view. Perhaps a course in human physiology would make you aware that there are a couple of one way valves that prevent upward movement past the alimentary canal.

GotSteel -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 5:45:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant since we all define ourselves, call yourself what you wish. Since I come down on the side of the skeptics on the other side, I'll go with that. No, no, no, I can't say this strongly enough NO. Skepticism isn't a position, it isn't a side, skepticism is a toolkit. Skepticism isn't a conclusion it's the method used to get there. You can take any side under the sun you're shitty thought process and lack of curiosity firmly prevent you from being a skeptic.

subrosaDom -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 6:26:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: subrosaDom If you put your head far enough up your ass eventually you shall pass through the alimentary canal and ultimately you will see daylight again with a renewed appreciation of an unobstructed view. Perhaps a course in human physiology would make you aware that there are a couple of one way valves that prevent upward movement past the alimentary canal. I presume that in your human physiology course, however, putting one's head up one's ass was straightforward? Is there video? Metaphors for thee but not for me?!! On second thought ...

subrosaDom -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 6:33:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant since we all define ourselves, call yourself what you wish. Since I come down on the side of the skeptics on the other side, I'll go with that. No, no, no, I can't say this strongly enough NO. Skepticism isn't a position, it isn't a side, skepticism is a toolkit. Skepticism isn't a conclusion it's the method used to get there. You can take any side under the sun you're shitty thought process and lack of curiosity firmly prevent you from being a skeptic. Yes, and skepticism about the non-flat earth we would all agree is idiotic. Ditto the Apollo moon landing. Ditto creationism/intelligent design. The issue is that when it comes to anthropogenic global warming and when you look at historical records of the Earth's climate going back millions of years, you find that global warming and cooling occurred for a variety of reasons and that we are dealing with a massively complex system that we cannot still adequately model. To lump skeptics in here with any of the foregoing positions is disingenuous. You cannot find legitimate scientists who advocate the foregoing. I already provided a link to a report featuring over 700 scientists involved in the UN report but not involved in writing it. There are real, legitimate issues here. Moreover, predictions have proved not to be true. Whether you are a logical positivist or not, Popper's Falsifiability Criterion has been met by predictions and the predictions have been far off base. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Now, go ahead and disagree -- many scientists do support anthropogenic global warming. Some of them have better arguments than others. The same is true for those who reject it. Truth is determined by reality not by the majority.

thompsonx -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 6:33:11 PM)
ORIGINAL: subrosaDom I presume that in your human physiology course, however, putting one's head up one's ass was straightforward? I was premed so I took a&p and no why would you think it was?

subrosaDom -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 6:34:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: subrosaDom I presume that in your human physiology course, however, putting one's head up one's ass was straightforward? I was premed so I took a&p and no why would you think it was? So you worked at it for a long, long time and eventually you succeeded? [:D]

thompsonx -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 6:38:43 PM)
ORIGINAL: subrosaDom The issue is that when it comes to anthropogenic global warming and when you look at historical records of the Earth's climate going back millions of years, Since the historical record only goes back something less than ten thousand years it would appear that once again you are talking out of your ass. What you should be referencing is the geologic record which does in fact go back tens of millions of years Truth is determined by reality not by the majority. Your arguement seems to be that truth is determined by the minority. As in those pimped punks who disagree with the real scientists.

thompsonx -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 6:40:47 PM)
ORIGINAL: subrosaDom So you worked at it for a long, long time and eventually you succeeded? [:D] Remember the one way valves I spoke of?

thishereboi -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 7:11:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi You don't think animals were around before humans? That's nothing like what he's claiming. Since your level of ignorance on this topic is so profound that you can't find your ass with both hands please go bounce a ball and leave smart people to deal with science classes. His claim was "The fact is there is overwhelming evidence the Earth is warming and no other cause exists but human activity." When I called bullshit on that and pointed out that even animal farts can contribute to it, he claimed "Raising animals for human consumption is human activity." at which point I explained that animals were around before we started raising them for food. Now there are a lot of things that contribute to global weather change and man is one of those. But to claim that is the only factor is pure stupidity.

subrosaDom -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 7:23:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: subrosaDom The issue is that when it comes to anthropogenic global warming and when you look at historical records of the Earth's climate going back millions of years, Since the historical record only goes back something less than ten thousand years it would appear that once again you are talking out of your ass. What you should be referencing is the geologic record which does in fact go back tens of millions of years Truth is determined by reality not by the majority. Your arguement seems to be that truth is determined by the minority. As in those pimped punks who disagree with the real scientists. Geology is part of the historical record. It is not necessarily part of the human record, of course. Truth is determined by reality, neither the minority or the majority.

subrosaDom -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 7:24:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: subrosaDom So you worked at it for a long, long time and eventually you succeeded? [:D] Remember the one way valves I spoke of? Powerful heads >> sphincters [:D]

GotSteel -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 7:48:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrosaDom Yes, and skepticism about the non-flat earth we would all agree is idiotic. We wouldn't agree actually.

GotSteel -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 8:25:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi at which point I explained that animals were around before we started raising them for food. At which point I was disgusted with you. I know you aren't mentally retarded please stop acting like you are. Ken knows full well that animals predate people as such that obvious fact isn't going to debunk his position.

DomKen -> RE: Gop trying to break science education again (9/11/2014 8:28:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi You don't think animals were around before humans? That's nothing like what he's claiming. Since your level of ignorance on this topic is so profound that you can't find your ass with both hands please go bounce a ball and leave smart people to deal with science classes. His claim was "The fact is there is overwhelming evidence the Earth is warming and no other cause exists but human activity." When I called bullshit on that and pointed out that even animal farts can contribute to it, he claimed "Raising animals for human consumption is human activity." at which point I explained that animals were around before we started raising them for food. Now there are a lot of things that contribute to global weather change and man is one of those. But to claim that is the only factor is pure stupidity. Then find a cause. Any one at all. But you best hurry up because the real scientists say we're rapidly approaching a tipping point.

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875