2016 even hotter than 2015 and 2014

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
What makes you believe I destruct the environment, and have self centered habits?
Click to expand...
i've seen pictures of you, tubby.

imagine of just one third of your caloric intake were shared by the third world. it would practically end world hunger.
 
Not GOP

Not GOP

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Science as a whole isn't settled, but things like human reproduction and human evolution or the atomic number of an element, all settled science. They are "settled" to the point that accurate predictions can be made based off of what is known about them, i.e. a male and a female have sex to become pregnant.

Same thing with anthropogenic climate change. We know enough about it to make accurate predictions about the future.

That's what makes it settled science. It doesn't mean we're done, we've figured it all out, that's it, we're finished
Click to expand...
You're comparing climate change on a planet that is millions of years old to child birth? wow

Elements on the peiodic table are not complicated, but I'm glad you brought it up because the science is not in on how elements react with each other. There are new discoveries every day. Even in regards to the earth's climate, which you claim to understand completely. What's it like to know everything, and then be wrong all the time?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
You're comparing climate change on a planet that is millions of years old to child birth? wow

Elements on the peiodic table are not complicated, but I'm glad you brought it up because the science is not in on how elements react with each other. There are new discoveries every day. Even in regards to the earth's climate, which you claim to understand completely. What's it like to know everything, and then be wrong all the time?
Click to expand...
what's it like to have to deny the vast and overwhelming worldwide scientific consensus on the causes and effects of manmade global warming?

must suck to be one tubby neckbeard arguing against NASA.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
You're comparing climate change on a planet that is millions of years old to child birth? wow

Elements on the peiodic table are not complicated, but I'm glad you brought it up because the science is not in on how elements react with each other. There are new discoveries every day. Even in regards to the earth's climate, which you claim to understand completely. What's it like to know everything, and then be wrong all the time?
Click to expand...
I'm comparing settled science with settled science

I didn't say the science is in on how elements react with each other. I said the science is settled on things like the atomic number. The number of protons in an element is what gives it its atomic number. So if you have an element with 1 proton, it will always be Hydrogen. 2 Protons, Helium, etc.

If you add CO2 to the atmosphere, it will heat it up. That's a fact from 4th grade science class
 
2ANONYMOUS

2ANONYMOUS

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Science as a whole isn't settled, but things like human reproduction and human evolution or the atomic number of an element, all settled science. They are "settled" to the point that accurate predictions can be made based off of what is known about them, i.e. a male and a female have sex to become pregnant.

Same thing with anthropogenic climate change. We know enough about it to make accurate predictions about the future.

That's what makes it settled science. It doesn't mean we're done, we've figured it all out, that's it, we're finished
Click to expand...
No such thing as settled science cause science keeps being corrected .
Is science a theory or Fact ???

It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."

n everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.

One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.

In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions
 
2ANONYMOUS

2ANONYMOUS

Well-Known Member
We all tend to think Humans are to blame for global warming how lame can that be although we do pollute land fills and other things there is a shit load of natural events that also dictate global warming
this is a cash cow for some one and the IMF is using it to the max
people tend to think that cause storms and disasters are more frequent that we are the cause
but yet we forget the our solar system and how its moving its not only Earth that is changing and were to blame like they want us to think we have moved into a higher energy area in space
 
Not GOP

Not GOP

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
I'm comparing settled science with settled science

I didn't say the science is in on how elements react with each other. I said the science is settled on things like the atomic number. The number of protons in an element is what gives it its atomic number. So if you have an element with 1 proton, it will always be Hydrogen. 2 Protons, Helium, etc.

If you add CO2 to the atmosphere, it will heat it up. That's a fact from 4th grade science class
Click to expand...
CO2 does escape the atmosphere. Also, ppm levels are nowhere near levels to create conditions you are talking about.
Other than the gas being essential to life on earth, the science is not in.
Man made global warming -science not in.
The establishment pushes this agenda to grow government, create new carbon taxes,
and seize more power over private property
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
Are you still going on with that chum Lee stuff? No matter how many times I prove you wrong, it's the same old spam with you everyday. You act like a little kid that ran out of Adderall
Click to expand...
you've never proved me wrong.

you said you were part of "smokestacks209".

an image search of google for that phrase brings up a group of fatass tubby folks sitting around.
 
Not GOP

Not GOP

Well-Known Member
ThickStemz said:
I know psychologist who would love to examine this guy. So many signs of mental pathology.
Click to expand...
For sure. but it's not the stupid part that bothers me. I'm used to that, living in retardville. 209
It's his constant repetition, posting the same exact thing over and over.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
For sure. but it's not the stupid part that bothers me. I'm used to that, living in retardville. 209
It's his constant repetition, posting the same exact thing over and over.
Click to expand...
my posts addressing you are responses.

if you are unsatisfied with my responses, give me something different to respond to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top