Science is not lying, you are.
Global Warming is NOT science; it is religion. It rejects logic, science, and mathematics. It rejects logic because it is a circularly-defined buzzword, thus rendering any argumentation based on it to be void. It rejects the laws of thermodynamics as well as the stefan boltzmann law, and it thinks that models are data. We don't have the means to measure the temperature of Earth (not enough thermometers). This is where AGW rejects mathematics...
Evolution is a religion; it is not science. Science has no theories about past unobserved events. Evolution may or may not be real.
Global Warming is NOT real. It outright rejects logic, science, and mathematics.
Republicans are anti schools anti science and media. Anyone who might tell you the truth.
I am anti PUBLIC schools; not anti schools.
I am a fully supporter of science. It is YOU who is denying science...
I am not anti media... I am anti media propaganda...
God you suck for sucking me into this argument
Climate change denial, or
global warming denial, is part of the
global warming controversy. It involves
denial, dismissal, or unwarranted doubt that contradicts the
scientific opinion on climate change, including the extent to which it is
caused by humans, its
impacts on nature and human society, or the potential of
adaptation to global warming by human actions.
[2][3][4]Some deniers endorse the term, while others prefer the term
climate change skepticism.
[3]Several scientists have noted that "skepticism" is
an inaccurate description for those who deny anthropogenic global warming.
[5][6][7] In effect, the two terms
form a continuous, overlapping range of views, and generally have the same characteristics: both reject, to a greater or lesser extent, the scientific consensus on climate change.
[8][9] Climate change denial can also be implicit, when individuals or social groups accept the science but fail to come to terms with it or to translate their acceptance into action.
[10] Several
social science studies have analyzed these positions as forms of
denialism[8][9] and
pseudoscience.
[11]
The campaign to undermine public trust in climate science has been described as a "denial machine" organized by industrial, political and ideological interests, and supported by conservative media and skeptical bloggers to
manufacture uncertainty about global warming.
[12][13][14] In the public debate, phrases such as
climate skepticism have frequently been used with the same meaning as
climate denialism.
[15] The labels are contested: those actively challenging climate science commonly describe themselves as "skeptics", but many do not comply with common standards of
scientific skepticism and, regardless of evidence, persistently deny the validity of human caused global warming.
[8]
Although
scientific opinion on climate change is that human activity is extremely likely to be the primary driver of climate change,
[16][17] the
politics of global warming have been affected by climate change denial, hindering efforts to
prevent climate change and
adapt to the warming climate.
[18][19][20] Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none.
[21][22]
Of the world's countries, the climate change denial industry is most powerful in the
United States.
[23][24] From 2015 to 2017 (after having already served from 2003 to 2007), the
United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works was chaired by
oil lobbyist and climate change denier
Jim Inhofe, who had previously called climate change "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated against the American people" and claimed to have debunked the alleged hoax in February 2015 when he brought a snowball with him in the Senate chamber and tossed it across the floor.
[25] He was succeeded in 2017 by
John Barrasso, who similarly said: "The climate is constantly changing. The role human activity plays is not known."
[26] Organised campaigning to undermine public trust in climate science is associated with
conservative economic policies and backed by industrial interests opposed to the regulation of CO
2 emissions.
[27] Climate change denial has been associated with the
fossil fuels lobby, the
Koch brothers, industry advocates and
conservative think tanks, often in the United States.
[19][28][29][30] More than 90% of papers sceptical on climate change originate from right-wing think tanks.
[31] The total annual income of these climate change counter-movement-organizations is roughly $900 million.
[32] Between 2002 and 2010, nearly $120 million (£77 million) was anonymously donated via the
Donors Trust and
Donors Capital Fund to more than 100 organisations seeking to undermine the public perception of the science on climate change.
[33] In 2013 the
Center for Media and Democracy reported that the
State Policy Network (SPN), an umbrella group of 64 U.S. think tanks, had been lobbying on behalf of major corporations and conservative donors to oppose climate change regulation.
[34]
Since the late 1970s,
oil companies have
published research broadly in line with the standard views on global warming. Despite this, oil companies organized a climate change denial campaign to disseminate public disinformation for several decades, a strategy that has been compared to the organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking by the
tobacco industry
So basically it's not just 100 scientists who believe global warming is real. It's research. Studies. Experiments. It's a collection of evidence that tells us no doubt men are causing global warming. Even most republicans admit it at this point.
So it's amazing to find someone like you who is still a flat earth freak.
What possible evidence can I show you that isn't already out there?
