The "Science is settled" narrative is STOOPID

[skookerasbil]

So turns out, Einsteins "Theory of Relativity", based upon the speed of light may have been wrong after all!!!!

When Science Is Wrong The Threat of Truth by Consensus PJ Media


Would Einstein, were he alive, try to shut out any new scientific possibilities? Based upon many, many statements he made during his life............no way!!!


Albert Einstein Quotes - 183 Science Quotes - Dictionary of Science Quotations and Scientist Quotes



But climate science is "settled"????

duh





Meanwhile, despite volumes of evidence in the scientific community that puts into question the validity of AGW, the AGW climate crusaders refuse to recognize any science other than their own science.

Fred Dyson, the most brilliant physicist on the planet in the 1950's and who took over for Einstein at Princeton after he died, said THIS >> “I think any good scientist ought to be a skeptic,” Dyson said.

Dyson also said THIS >>>

But that approach lost out to the computer-modeling approach favored by climate scientists. And that approach was flawed from the beginning, Dyson said.

“I just think they don’t understand the climate,” he said of climatologists. “Their computer models are full of fudge factors.”

A major fudge factor concerns the role of clouds. The greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide on its own is limited. To get to the apocalyptic projections trumpeted by Al Gore and company, the models have to include assumptions that CO-2 will cause clouds to form in a way that produces more warming.

“The models are extremely oversimplified,” he said. “They don’t represent the clouds in detail at all. They simply use a fudge factor to represent the clouds.”



In other words, these people are so full of shit, its not even real.


Religion? Most definitely.

Science? Most definitely....................not.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

 

[amrchaos]

A little investigation reveals that the experiments concerning the speed of the mu neutrinos were flawed.

Further experiments showed that the neutrinos did not travel faster than light, given acceptable stat error.


Even so, this shows us how science actually works--give scientist an example to the contrary, and everybody start experimenting and re-examining the theory just so they can "improve the model"

 

[Freewill]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

How many low lying islands are now under water? And are we sure they are not underwater because too many people caused them to sink as suggested by one Democrat representative?

 

[skookerasbil]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

s0n.....is that you in the avatar? You look like a fuckking dummy. You miss the whole point of the thread...........not that it matters, you being amongst the hard core religion.

Anyway.......since the data is rigged anyway, the models and they science are ghey.

 

[mamooth]

According to skook here, since we don't know everything about gravity, then we can say nothing about gravity, so we shouldn't have launched any spacecraft.

Non-morons, of course, would say that even though we don't know everything about gravity, the science of gravity is settled _enough_, therefore we can launch spacecraft.

Same with climate science. We don't know everything, but it's settled _enough_ that we can make some very definite conclusions. Non-morons understand the difference between "absolutely settled" and "settled enough". If someone doesn't, they're too stupid to be in this conversation.

Skook, alas, can't understand something that simple, being that decades of gleefully chugging the denier cult piss that he savors so much has left him brain-damaged. It's also given him a muscular disorder, most obvious in the limpness of his wrists that he so proudly advertises.

Oh, Dyson was a moron on the global warming issue. Scientists tend to get stupid and cranky when they get old, raving about how they don't understand those young whippernsappers.

 

[Coyote]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

s0n.....is that you in the avatar? You look like a fuckking dummy. You miss the whole point of the thread...........not that it matters, you being amongst the hard core religion.

Anyway.......since the data is rigged anyway, the models and they science are ghey.

Is that all you can come up with Skook? Attacking a person's avatar (this, from a guy who uses a Japanimation superhero) and calling everything "ghey"?

He makes an intersting point: It's not all computer models. What about the data that isn't computer models?

 

[jc456]

Laugh out loud all night long and this one ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha

 

[jc456]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

s0n.....is that you in the avatar? You look like a fuckking dummy. You miss the whole point of the thread...........not that it matters, you being amongst the hard core religion.

Anyway.......since the data is rigged anyway, the models and they science are ghey.

Is that all you can come up with Skook? Attacking a person's avatar (this, from a guy who uses a Japanimation superhero) and calling everything "ghey"?

He makes an intersting point: It's not all computer models. What about the data that isn't computer models?

It's all manipulated, artificial, made up, that's what's wrong. and coyote, we've asked and asked and asked and asked and asked for the experiment to prove the theory.and zip nada.

 

[Coyote]

Laugh out loud all night long and this one ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha

Calm down. We don't want you to choke on all that spittle. And clean off your keyboard while your at it.

Ok...do you have a grip now?

What about the data that isn't computer models?

 

[jc456]

According to skook here, since we don't know everything about gravity, then we can say nothing about gravity, so we shouldn't have launched any spacecraft.

Non-morons, of course, would say that even though we don't know everything about gravity, the science of gravity is settled _enough_, therefore we can launch spacecraft.

Same with climate science. We don't know everything, but it's settled _enough_ that we can make some very definite conclusions. Non-morons understand the difference between "absolutely settled" and "settled enough". If someone doesn't, they're too stupid to be in this conversation.

Skook, alas, can't understand something that simple, being that decades of gleefully chugging the denier cult piss that he savors so much has left him brain-damaged. It's also given him a muscular disorder, most obvious in the limpness of his wrists that he so proudly advertises.

Oh, Dyson was a moron on the global warming issue. Scientists tend to get stupid and cranky when they get old, raving about how they don't understand those young whippernsappers.

Hey tooth, he never said such a thing if you're going to put it in writing then prove it with the quote "let's see it buddy, buddy, lady whatever you are but see it.

 

[Coyote]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

s0n.....is that you in the avatar? You look like a fuckking dummy. You miss the whole point of the thread...........not that it matters, you being amongst the hard core religion.

Anyway.......since the data is rigged anyway, the models and they science are ghey.

Is that all you can come up with Skook? Attacking a person's avatar (this, from a guy who uses a Japanimation superhero) and calling everything "ghey"?

He makes an intersting point: It's not all computer models. What about the data that isn't computer models?

It's all manipulated, artificial, made up, that's what's wrong. and coyote, we've asked and asked and asked and asked and asked for the experiment to prove the theory.and zip nada.

Really?

What about ocean acidification?

 

[jc456]

Laugh out loud all night long and this one ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha

Calm down. We don't want you to choke on all that spittle. And clean off your keyboard while your at it.

Ok...do you have a grip now?

What about the data that isn't computer models?

Wow arswipe that was pretty good

 

[jc456]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

s0n.....is that you in the avatar? You look like a fuckking dummy. You miss the whole point of the thread...........not that it matters, you being amongst the hard core religion.

Anyway.......since the data is rigged anyway, the models and they science are ghey.

Is that all you can come up with Skook? Attacking a person's avatar (this, from a guy who uses a Japanimation superhero) and calling everything "ghey"?

He makes an intersting point: It's not all computer models. What about the data that isn't computer models?

It's all manipulated, artificial, made up, that's what's wrong. and coyote, we've asked and asked and asked and asked and asked for the experiment to prove the theory.and zip nada.

Really?

What about ocean acidification?

What about it?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

How many low lying islands are now under water? And are we sure they are not underwater because too many people caused them to sink as suggested by one Democrat representative?

Entire nation of Kiribati to be relocated over rising sea level threat - Telegraph

 

[Coyote]

So turns out, Einsteins "Theory of Relativity", based upon the speed of light may have been wrong after all!!!!

When Science Is Wrong The Threat of Truth by Consensus PJ Media


Would Einstein, were he alive, try to shut out any new scientific possibilities? Based upon many, many statements he made during his life............no way!!!


Albert Einstein Quotes - 183 Science Quotes - Dictionary of Science Quotations and Scientist Quotes



But climate science is "settled"????

duh





Meanwhile, despite volumes of evidence in the scientific community that puts into question the validity of AGW, the AGW climate crusaders refuse to recognize any science other than their own science.

Fred Dyson, the most brilliant physicist on the planet in the 1950's and who took over for Einstein at Princeton after he died, said THIS >> “I think any good scientist ought to be a skeptic,” Dyson said.

Dyson also said THIS >>>

But that approach lost out to the computer-modeling approach favored by climate scientists. And that approach was flawed from the beginning, Dyson said.

“I just think they don’t understand the climate,” he said of climatologists. “Their computer models are full of fudge factors.”

A major fudge factor concerns the role of clouds. The greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide on its own is limited. To get to the apocalyptic projections trumpeted by Al Gore and company, the models have to include assumptions that CO-2 will cause clouds to form in a way that produces more warming.

“The models are extremely oversimplified,” he said. “They don’t represent the clouds in detail at all. They simply use a fudge factor to represent the clouds.”



In other words, these people are so full of shit, its not even real.


Religion? Most definitely.

Science? Most definitely....................not.

The brilliancy of science is not that it is always "right" but that it can change when new evidence comes along. Scientific theories are theories that give the best explanation to fit the available facts at the time. For example Mendel and genetics. We know now that some of his ideas on how it worked were wrong - new technology constantly opens up new avenues for research that challanges our theories. Sometimes it overturns them, sometimes it just changes parts of them (like Mendel's theory of heredity).

Scientific consensus is a consensus is also based upon a large body of evidence supporting certain conclusions and in the case of anthropogenic climate change that body comes from a variety of disciplines. When something is "settled science" that doesn't mean it's unchanging. Evolution as a core principle, is "settled science" but a lot of the details are still changing and there are still a lot of unanswered questions. Likewise, the idea that human activities are influencing climate has become pretty much "settled science" though the degree to which that is occuring is still under debate.

 

[jc456]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

How many low lying islands are now under water? And are we sure they are not underwater because too many people caused them to sink as suggested by one Democrat representative?

Entire nation of Kiribati to be relocated over rising sea level threat - Telegraph

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

 

[Coyote]

Computer models are only as reliable as the facts coded into them. But climate change isn't based on computer models or anything other than the very simplest observations like how low-lying islands are now under water. How sea levels are rising. How it's getting warmer in places where it shouldn't like Alaska.

A computer model can say whatever the programmer wants it to say. But you can't spoof Nature.

How many low lying islands are now under water? And are we sure they are not underwater because too many people caused them to sink as suggested by one Democrat representative?

Entire nation of Kiribati to be relocated over rising sea level threat - Telegraph

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

I take it you have stock in flotation device companies?

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[Coyote]

Laugh out loud all night long and this one ha ha Ha ha ha ha ha Ha ha ha

Calm down. We don't want you to choke on all that spittle. And clean off your keyboard while your at it.

Ok...do you have a grip now?

What about the data that isn't computer models?

Wow arswipe that was pretty good

We seem to have a communication problem. Do I need to dumb down the question further? (not sure if that is possible).