Over 90% of worldwide scientists accept climate change, so why not Americans?

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
Brilliant! Wonderful fact-based debate! Everyone who disagrees with me is a retard. Do you actually have any knowledge on the subject at all?
Click to expand...
lol, do you?

i think we should start putting incompetent machinists up against peer reviewed, publishing climatologists and see what happens!
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
i really shouldn't, none of these people are qualified to speak on the matter. i just got done with a long drive and this seemed an easy target to get my feet back in the water. also, skunkdoc is a douche.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are so well-qualified. An unemployed, pants shitting, bed wetting ideologue. We await for any more pearls of insight you may toss our way.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
Yes, you are so well-qualified. An unemployed, pants shitting, bed wetting ideologue. We await for any more pearls of insight you may toss our way.
Click to expand...
all i'm doing is deferring to the vast majority of publishing, peer reviewed climatologists who have formed overwhelming scientific consensus on the issue.

and at least i can keep my wife alive, something you apparently suck at doing.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
That makes no sense at all. Revolutionary scientific discoveries are always worth money, nor does science come to conclusions based upon profit as eventualy those conclusions will be proven false - and then there goes that money. There have always been fakes and frauds in science but they don't last - because the person who uncovers the fraud gains notoriety and usually manages to profit from that.
Click to expand...
Revolutionary scientific discoveries are not always worth money. Tesla comes to mind. The money doesn't just evaporate just because one's conclusion were false. Al Gore has made, and continues to make 100's of millions promoting his new religion, while continuing to personally use magnitudes more energy than the average American. Will all that money disappear if he is proven to be a charlatan? No, it won't.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
Revolutionary scientific discoveries are not always worth money. Tesla comes to mind. The money doesn't just evaporate just because one's conclusion were false. Al Gore has made, and continues to make 100's of millions promoting his new religion, while continuing to personally use magnitudes more energy than the average American. Will all that money disappear if he is proven to be a charlatan? No, it won't.
Click to expand...
sounds like someone is jealous of al gore. :lol:
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
I lost a lot of respect or them when I found out that they often use conservative based "think tanks" for some of their information and opinions. This argument that science has been wrong and so they are wrong when we don't like their findings is a sad one. We can say that "science" thought radium was just fine for use in clock dials and in order to enhance men's sexual performance, but then they found out that it caused cancer or simply killed people outright. Does that mean that science was wrong twice? If you are basing your reality around science proving itself wrong I'll try to get you a gram or two of radium that you can paint your crotch with, after all, they were wrong about radium, so this stuff is perfectly harmless, right? The opening portion of Penn and Teller's discussion violates logic and also insults the idea of science. This sort of argument uses the short perspective of science in an effort to disprove the long view. The POINT of science is that its explanations of natural phenomenon are subject to change in order to be more accurate and as new information becomes available. This does not mean that science is fallible, it means that science works as intended. If you want a source of understanding and explanation that is ALWAYS right ALL the time from the first gitgo then I recommend you turn to religion. After all, the bible is always right, has never contradicted itself and will always remain accurate and true. (oh, I forgot, Penn is an atheist isn't he)
Click to expand...
You do realize your argument could be used by either side, don't you? No, probably not.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
You really don't know the reason? They have a need for consistency in world view (even though they many times need to resort to compartmentalization in order to achieve it). This consistency is accomplished in one of two ways, either one alters one's world view to suit reality, or one alter's their perception of reality in order to confirm or at least not upset, their already established view of the world. We find this happens most often in right wing authoritarian types. They cannot manage discrepencies in their viewpoints vs reality and so they simply change the reality around them to suit what they already believe. This makes them poor consumers of information because they are unable to actually digest those nuggets that are contrary to their "gut".
Click to expand...
You really don't know the reason? They have a need for consistency in world view (even though they many times need to resort to compartmentalization in order to achieve it). This consistency is accomplished in one of two ways, either one alters one's world view to suit reality, or one alter's their perception of reality in order to confirm or at least not upset, their already established view of the world. We find this happens most often in left wing authoritarian types. They cannot manage discrepencies in their viewpoints vs reality and so they simply change the reality around them to suit what they already believe. This makes them poor consumers of information because they are unable to actually digest those nuggets that are contrary to their "gut". ............. Both statements seem equally valid.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
You really don't know the reason? They have a need for consistency in world view (even though they many times need to resort to compartmentalization in order to achieve it). This consistency is accomplished in one of two ways, either one alters one's world view to suit reality, or one alter's their perception of reality in order to confirm or at least not upset, their already established view of the world. We find this happens most often in left wing authoritarian types. They cannot manage discrepencies in their viewpoints vs reality and so they simply change the reality around them to suit what they already believe. This makes them poor consumers of information because they are unable to actually digest those nuggets that are contrary to their "gut". ............. Both statements seem equally valid.
Click to expand...
except we're not the ones positing wildly impossible conspiracy theories about something that the scientific community is already in consensus about.

so it doesn't work both ways.
 
cleverpiggy

cleverpiggy

Well-Known Member
Climate change is as fake and mythical as dragons, unicorns and perpetual motion machines! Stop lining the pockets of the elites with their new wealth redistribution/ reinvention programs. Wake the fuck up!!! Anyone can make up fake stats, I just read that only 10% of scientist think climate change is real... Now prove that wrong! Humans collectively think we are so righteous but in fact we are fear mongering idiots bent on fear and mysticism, for instance...The Mayan calendar garbage. Stop the perpetuation of bunk/fake extrapolated science immediately because it hinders real science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top