Are Some Folks Trying to Politicize Climate Change Science?

[Oddball]

Oh my - you mean with ALL this "scientific" evidence debunking climate change - NO ONE can produce a single piece of peer-reviewed work?????????

Welcome to the Web Site of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change

 

[Si modo]

Tell ya what - when you can provide a rebutal from a peer-reviewed scientific journal - get back to me. Until then, I'll continue to snicker at the bafoonery of trying to rebut science with political commentary.

But I'll think I'll be long gone before anyone produces THAT. But if they CAN - I'm listening.

I dunno i'm not a scientis I just listen to the data many present. Why dont you email one of these 31,000 scientists who agree with that article I posted. Home - Global Warming Petition Project

Why do YOU email them and ask these oil company geologists to m to submit their "work" for peer review. THEN we can talk.

First of all - calm the fuck down.

Secondly, consensus is irrelevant. Scientists don't vote on what is supported and what is falsified in science.

Thirdly, anyone who uses news media outlets for support of a point in science is not quite thinking for themselves.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Earth has a fever and Democrats are the rectal thermometer who provide us with constant updates

Now THAT''S funny. They obviously slept through 3rd grade science when we learned about ice ages and such. Probably to busy whining about having to pay for their own lunch.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Oh my - you mean with ALL this "scientific" evidence debunking climate change - NO ONE can produce a single piece of peer-reviewed work?????????

Just silly rhetoric?????? Spelling lessons? Vulgar insults? BUT NO SCIENCE???????

Is THIS where I act surprised?

None of the holy peer-reviewed pseudo science claiming man is to blame for climate change can quantify how much man's activities are to blame.

But hey....You just keep on bagin' up that Kool-Aid.

But I thought scientic consensus was "political" anyway - the "ain't got no use for yer fancy book larnin'" approach. But now you want to accept that consensus and quibble degree?

No sweat - you guys quibble "best possible scenario - worst possible scenario" all you want. I'll weigh in on that by saying Al Gore's movie gravitates without fail to the worst possible scenario which I believe the science does not justify.

 

[Oddball]

Why don't YOU email them and ask these oil company geologists to submit their "work" for peer review. THEN we can talk.

Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!"), but this is actually not that common. A more typical manifestation of argumentum ad hominem is attacking a source of information -- for example, responding to a quotation from Richard Nixon on the subject of free trade with China by saying, "We all know Nixon was a liar and a cheat, so why should we believe anything he says?" Argumentum ad hominem also occurs when someone's arguments are discounted merely because they stand to benefit from the policy they advocate -- such as Bill Gates arguing against antitrust, rich people arguing for lower taxes, white people arguing against affirmative action, minorities arguing for affirmative action, etc. In all of these cases, the relevant question is not who makes the argument, but whether the argument is valid.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Oh my - you mean with ALL this "scientific" evidence debunking climate change - NO ONE can produce a single piece of peer-reviewed work?????????

Welcome to the Web Site of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change

Again NOT ONE PIECE from a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
If you don't know what that means - look it up.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

As a "Science" Climatology falls between phrenology and palmistry because a science as bedrock as physics can't explain gravity in our own neighborhood, how the hell are you supposed to take ManMade Global Warming as serious "Science"

Pioneer anomaly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clue: Get one today

 

[nodoginnafight]

si modo - I'm VERY calm.

 

[Oddball]

But I thought scientic consensus was "political" anyway - the "ain't got no use for yer fancy book larnin'" approach. But now you want to accept that consensus and quibble degree?

No sweat - you guys quibble "best possible scenario - worst possible scenario" all you want. I'll weigh in on that by saying Al Gore's movie gravitates without fail to the worst possible scenario which I believe the science does not justify.

You're the one who is short here on that "fancy book learnin", when it comes to your litany of logical fallacies.

Now, find just one of those holy peer-reviewed studies that can quantify, with absolute certainty, how much man's activities are to blame for gullible warming.

We're all waiting.

 

[nodoginnafight]

As a "Science" Climatology falls between phrenology and palmistry because a science as bedrock as physics can't explain gravity in our own neighborhood, how the hell are you supposed to take ManMAde Global Warming as serious "Science"

Pioneer anomaly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clue: Get one today

No peer-reviewed science just a re-hashing of the "ain't got no use fer yer fancy book larnin' " defense.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

how the hell are you supposed to take ManMAde Global Warming as serious "Science"

'cause it feels soooooooooooo good to feel sooooooooooo guilty and at the same time so God-like in so far as you think you can affect Mother Earth with the car you drive and the lightbulbs you buy. These people are NUTS.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

No peer-reviewed science just a re-hashing of the "ain't got no use fer yer fancy book larnin' " defense.

That's like having Mengela review the "Final Solution" and getting a big thumbs up on it's positive effects on humanity.

 

[nodoginnafight]

btw - I don't believe O.J. Simpson when he say's he innocent either - no onus to email him. I don't email everyone I don't believe. The onus is clearly on the psuedo scientists to submit their "work" for peer review. If there are no gaping holes, why wouldn't they do it - it's what SERIOUS scientists do.
Unless.... unless they're afraid they will be exposed???????

 

[Si modo]

Anyone who is familiar with even some of the peer-reviewed work knows (if they are honest) that the state of the science does not allow for ANY definitive claim about the significance of man's effect on climate change.

The news media outlets will beg to differ, though.

 

[Oddball]

Oh my - you mean with ALL this "scientific" evidence debunking climate change - NO ONE can produce a single piece of peer-reviewed work?????????

Welcome to the Web Site of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change

Again NOT ONE PIECE from a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
If you don't know what that means - look it up.

Are you this thick by birth, or is this a life's work?

BTW, you'd best get up to speed on what Rand thought of environmentalist nutburgers like yourself.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"environmental nutburgers." he he he he

 

[nodoginnafight]

The fact that THIS is all you guys can muster up - EXACTLY as predicted - pretty much settles the case.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"Climate Change" Yeah? So fucking what?

The climate changes.. I learned that in third grade and I don't recall my teacher telling me to soil myself over it.

NEXT.

 

[Oddball]

The fact that THIS is all you guys can muster up - EXACTLY as predicted - pretty much settles the case.

The only thing it settles is that you're completely unwilling to look at any contravening evidence.

Now be a good lemming and shoot up your green Kool-Aid.

 

[Si modo]

The fact that THIS is all you guys can muster up - EXACTLY as predicted - pretty much settles the case.

Tell you what; let's say, as this IS a topic you brought up, that you give us a reference to a peer-reviewed paper that is actually conclusive on the significance of man's effect on global warming/climate change - not just a claim based on their model presented.