Simple Question for Those Who Subscribe to AGW....

[Sunsettommy]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

Which part of that do you think amounts to physical evidence that supports the contention that carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

I asked a simple question...what's the matter, can't provide some simple physical evidence? What is science without physical evidence?

All of it is evidence. I won't entertain your spin or your stupid questions that don't matter to the grand scheme of things. Human caused climate change is changing our planet. All the scientists agree. The 3% who don't are lobbyists for the global polluters. Wake up.

Physical? I don't know. What physical evidence is there for evolution? Do you doubt evolution? What is your theory on that and what evidence do you have on your theory besides the bible?

What physical evidence do you have that GW isn't being caused by man? Remember, the scientists have already heard everything that is going to come out of your mouth and they explain over and over why your arguments are all fatally flawed.

Once again YOU FAILED to present EMPIRICAL evidence, far into the future Modeling scenarios are NOT empirical, it is unverified pseudoscience.

It is clear you don't know what the NULL hypothesis is and that the concept of The Scientific Method is foreign to you.

Why is SSDD's Question so difficult for you to answer?

 

[Billy_Bob]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

 

[sealybobo]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

Which part of that do you think amounts to physical evidence that supports the contention that carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

I asked a simple question...what's the matter, can't provide some simple physical evidence? What is science without physical evidence?

All of it is evidence. I won't entertain your spin or your stupid questions that don't matter to the grand scheme of things. Human caused climate change is changing our planet. All the scientists agree. The 3% who don't are lobbyists for the global polluters. Wake up.

Physical? I don't know. What physical evidence is there for evolution? Do you doubt evolution? What is your theory on that and what evidence do you have on your theory besides the bible?

What physical evidence do you have that GW isn't being caused by man? Remember, the scientists have already heard everything that is going to come out of your mouth and they explain over and over why your arguments are all fatally flawed.

Once again YOU FAILED to present EMPIRICAL evidence, far into the future Modeling scenarios are NOT empirical, it is unverified pseudoscience.

It is clear you don't know what the NULL hypothesis is and that the concept of The Scientific Method is foreign to you.

Why is SSDD's Question so difficult for you to answer?

Yes, you want evidence that isn't possible. But the fact is all the non empirical evidence suggests man caused global warming, and evolution. But you deny both right?

Everything you say is right wing spin. Every argument you make, a scientist has explained the flaw in your thinking, but you keep thinking the same things. Fuck the facts right?

If it was your love one who was murdered and they didn't have any empirical evidence you'd want the jury to convict if there were 1000 pieces of unempirical evidence right?

 

[sealybobo]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

Yes, base line hypothesis This is the kind of shit a stupid Republican says that is typically an argument made in order to confuse and distract from all the real evidence.

base line hypothesis? What is your base line hypotheis based on empirical evidence?

And guess what? The scientists on this planet say you are wrong. Your reply back to that is that there is a vast scientific conspiracy among the scientific community. You're a fucking loon.

 

[sealybobo]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Yes, you want evidence that isn't possible. But the fact is all the non empirical evidence suggests man caused global warming, and evolution.

You are hilarious... There is ample empirically observed evidence that AGW is not happening. As all of your predictive models fail empirical review, you have no proof of anything and yet you want us to "believe"...

A religion based on feelings... Nice... No thank You!

 

[Billy_Bob]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

 

[sealybobo]

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Yes his IQ is 182 and he is 6'3 and 220 lbs. LOL

 

[sealybobo]

Yes, you want evidence that isn't possible. But the fact is all the non empirical evidence suggests man caused global warming, and evolution.

You are hilarious... There is ample empirically observed evidence that AGW is not happening. As all of your predictive models fail empirical review, you have no proof of anything and yet you want us to "believe"...

A religion based on feelings... Nice... No thank You!

Sorry but since we lack empirical evidence I'm basing my belief on pure logic

Empirical evidence is verifiable by observation rather than theory or logic.

You don't have a theory or logic. You certainly don't have a scientific theory.

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.1

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate.

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2 Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming.3

The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.

I could go on and on. This is all from NASA you schmuck. Flat earth mother fuckers.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Yes his IQ is 182 and he is 6'3 and 220 lbs. LOL

Your IQ is <0 And your a dupe, useful Idiot... Nothing more..

You still haven't explained the Hypothesis nor have you explained why all modeling fails... Why is that?

 

[sealybobo]

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Maybe one time he was smart

Trump's cognitive deficits seem worse. We need to know if he has dementia

We see signs that the president's abilities are declining, but the only way to find out for sure is to give him a full neuropsychological evaluation.

And not his doctors who we know will lie

 

[sealybobo]

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Yes his IQ is 182 and he is 6'3 and 220 lbs. LOL

Your IQ is <0 And your a dupe, useful Idiot... Nothing more..

You still haven't explained the Hypothesis nor have you explained why all modeling fails... Why is that?

Why do you think? No wait. You don't think. You only repeat bad arguments. Go ahead, make your best bad argument and I'll debunk that bullshit.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Sorry but since we lack empirical evidence I'm basing my belief on pure logic

Logic....?



You wouldn't know logic if it bit you on the ass. Logic requires the scientific method and systematic ruling out of all other potential sources and causes, WHICH THE AGW CROWD HAS NOT DONE. You have any clue about what the NULL HYPOTHESIS is?

IF you had any real science to back up your claims you wont post it...

 

[Billy_Bob]

The alarmists list of 'appeals to authority and fallacy arguments'... Nice... Do you have ANY empirical evidence to back up ANY of these claims?

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Maybe one time he was smart

Trump's cognitive deficits seem worse. We need to know if he has dementia

We see signs that the president's abilities are declining, but the only way to find out for sure is to give him a full neuropsychological evaluation.

And not his doctors who we know will lie

I love TV doctors who have NEVER SEEN THE PERSON commenting, diagnosing and violating their Hippocratic oaths...

Nice inflammatory Deflection to avoid presenting real facts...

 

[Third Party]

Simple Question for Those Who Subscribe to AGW....

I.E., the global scientific community. But you dont ply your nonsense with them, necause you qould get laughed out of the room. By the way, they are the ones who have the evidence.

Uh, haven't seen THEIR evidence yet.

 

[Sunsettommy]

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

If you have it....lets see it. If you don't....then lets hear your best excuse for not providing it.

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

Which part of that do you think amounts to physical evidence that supports the contention that carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

I asked a simple question...what's the matter, can't provide some simple physical evidence? What is science without physical evidence?

All of it is evidence. I won't entertain your spin or your stupid questions that don't matter to the grand scheme of things. Human caused climate change is changing our planet. All the scientists agree. The 3% who don't are lobbyists for the global polluters. Wake up.

Physical? I don't know. What physical evidence is there for evolution? Do you doubt evolution? What is your theory on that and what evidence do you have on your theory besides the bible?

What physical evidence do you have that GW isn't being caused by man? Remember, the scientists have already heard everything that is going to come out of your mouth and they explain over and over why your arguments are all fatally flawed.

Once again YOU FAILED to present EMPIRICAL evidence, far into the future Modeling scenarios are NOT empirical, it is unverified pseudoscience.

It is clear you don't know what the NULL hypothesis is and that the concept of The Scientific Method is foreign to you.

Why is SSDD's Question so difficult for you to answer?

Yes, you want evidence that isn't possible. But the fact is all the non empirical evidence suggests man caused global warming, and evolution. But you deny both right?

Everything you say is right wing spin. Every argument you make, a scientist has explained the flaw in your thinking, but you keep thinking the same things. Fuck the facts right?

If it was your love one who was murdered and they didn't have any empirical evidence you'd want the jury to convict if there were 1000 pieces of unempirical evidence right?

You are soooo dumb because you make clear you have no idea what EMPIRICAL means to science research, from Merriam-Webster:

Definition of empirical

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience empirical data
2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory an empirical basis for the theory
3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment empirical laws
4 : of or relating to empiricism

You can't offer anything scientific without real evidence, which is what UNVERIFIED long into the future Modeling scenarios lacks. Far into the future climate models lacks verification because there is no evidence or data available...., surely that was obvious....?

Again you have IGNORED the two scientific Concepts, The NULL hypothesis and The Scientific Method.

You used the words non empirical, lets see what the dictionary says about it:

nonempirical

1. "Not based on any empirical evidence; faith-driven
   a nonempirical belief system
2. (sciences) Not relying directly on data; theory-driven"

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

You have NOTHING of substance to offer, which is why people are laughing at you.

By the way you still haven't answered SSDD question/request for EMPIRICAL research.....

 

[Sunsettommy]

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Yes his IQ is 182 and he is 6'3 and 220 lbs. LOL

Your IQ is <0 And your a dupe, useful Idiot... Nothing more..

You still haven't explained the Hypothesis nor have you explained why all modeling fails... Why is that?

Sealy writes a boo boo,

Sorry but since we lack empirical evidence I'm basing my belief on pure logic

He is doing a great job proving he is dumb as hell, his claim that he uses PURE LOGIC is what guides him when evidence is lacking. Lets see what a Dictionary says about it:

…Pure Logic, a phrase often used, but to which no distinct conception can be attached. [—] Perhaps we may say that pure logic is a logic deduced from hypotheses (which some will look upon as axioms) without any inquiry into the observational warrant for those hypotheses.

Pure Logic is for people who don't have empirical evidence up their sleeves.

 

[sealybobo]

Spin spin spin, spin spin spin, lies bullshit propaganda

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Maybe one time he was smart

Trump's cognitive deficits seem worse. We need to know if he has dementia

We see signs that the president's abilities are declining, but the only way to find out for sure is to give him a full neuropsychological evaluation.

And not his doctors who we know will lie

I love TV doctors who have NEVER SEEN THE PERSON commenting, diagnosing and violating their Hippocratic oaths...

Nice inflammatory Deflection to avoid presenting real facts...

I'm waiting for you to present facts that prove man made global warming isn't real. So is the scientific community.

This is just like the evolution argument. We've presented all our evidence, and where is your evidence on the bible?

 

[sealybobo]

That is all you are doing... You cant even tell me what the base line hypothesis is and how its supposed to be accomplished. Thus you dont have a fucking clue other than what your masters tell you to spout...

You and Trump sound just like the idiots on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. YOUR Masters.

Have you watched the movie about Fox News and Roger Ailes? They are lying to you dude. They invented that media to brainwash right wing fucktards in our society. They give you your talking points.

Considering Trumps IQ is 182 and he is creating millions of jobs and cutting the red tape of Marxism you all are trying to employ, I will wear that as a badge of honor...

Yes his IQ is 182 and he is 6'3 and 220 lbs. LOL

Your IQ is <0 And your a dupe, useful Idiot... Nothing more..

You still haven't explained the Hypothesis nor have you explained why all modeling fails... Why is that?

Sealy writes a boo boo,

Sorry but since we lack empirical evidence I'm basing my belief on pure logic

He is doing a great job proving he is dumb as hell, his claim that he uses PURE LOGIC is what guides him when evidence is lacking. Lets see what a Dictionary says about it:

…Pure Logic, a phrase often used, but to which no distinct conception can be attached. [—] Perhaps we may say that pure logic is a logic deduced from hypotheses (which some will look upon as axioms) without any inquiry into the observational warrant for those hypotheses.

Pure Logic is for people who don't have empirical evidence up their sleeves.

Here is what you Republicans are doing on this and every other issue

"Alternative facts" was a phrase used by U.S. Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway during a Meet the Press interview on January 22, 2017, in which she defended White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer's false statement about the attendance numbers of Donald Trump's inauguration as President of the United States. When pressed during the interview with Chuck Todd to explain why Spicer would "utter a provable falsehood", Conway stated that Spicer was giving "alternative facts". Todd responded, "Look, alternative facts are not facts. They're falsehoods."

 

[sealybobo]

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

99 reasons you deniers are idiots

99 One-Liners That Rebut Climate Change Denier Talking Points – Alternet.org

Which part of that do you think amounts to physical evidence that supports the contention that carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?

I asked a simple question...what's the matter, can't provide some simple physical evidence? What is science without physical evidence?

All of it is evidence. I won't entertain your spin or your stupid questions that don't matter to the grand scheme of things. Human caused climate change is changing our planet. All the scientists agree. The 3% who don't are lobbyists for the global polluters. Wake up.

Physical? I don't know. What physical evidence is there for evolution? Do you doubt evolution? What is your theory on that and what evidence do you have on your theory besides the bible?

What physical evidence do you have that GW isn't being caused by man? Remember, the scientists have already heard everything that is going to come out of your mouth and they explain over and over why your arguments are all fatally flawed.

Once again YOU FAILED to present EMPIRICAL evidence, far into the future Modeling scenarios are NOT empirical, it is unverified pseudoscience.

It is clear you don't know what the NULL hypothesis is and that the concept of The Scientific Method is foreign to you.

Why is SSDD's Question so difficult for you to answer?

Yes, you want evidence that isn't possible. But the fact is all the non empirical evidence suggests man caused global warming, and evolution. But you deny both right?

Everything you say is right wing spin. Every argument you make, a scientist has explained the flaw in your thinking, but you keep thinking the same things. Fuck the facts right?

If it was your love one who was murdered and they didn't have any empirical evidence you'd want the jury to convict if there were 1000 pieces of unempirical evidence right?

You are soooo dumb because you make clear you have no idea what EMPIRICAL means to science research, from Merriam-Webster:

Definition of empirical

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience empirical data
2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory an empirical basis for the theory
3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment empirical laws
4 : of or relating to empiricism

You can't offer anything scientific without real evidence, which is what UNVERIFIED long into the future Modeling scenarios lacks. Far into the future climate models lacks verification because there is no evidence or data available...., surely that was obvious....?

Again you have IGNORED the two scientific Concepts, The NULL hypothesis and The Scientific Method.

You used the words non empirical, lets see what the dictionary says about it:

nonempirical

1. "Not based on any empirical evidence; faith-driven
   a nonempirical belief system
2. (sciences) Not relying directly on data; theory-driven"

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

You have NOTHING of substance to offer, which is why people are laughing at you.

By the way you still haven't answered SSDD question/request for EMPIRICAL research.....

There's lots of evidence that the scientists have presented that can be verified. So is it empirical?