The Sound of Settled Science: Many Studies' Results Cannot Be Reproduced

Oh, well then, clearly all of your religious garbage is spot on, and we need to throw out our mountains of scientific knowledge. How do we know which to throw out? Simple: anything that doesn't jibe with your personal superstitions, politics, and fetishes, of course.
 
Oh, well then, clearly all of your religious garbage is spot on, and we need to throw out our mountains of scientific knowledge. How do we know which to throw out? Simple: anything that doesn't jibe with your personal superstitions, politics, and fetishes, of course.
What a retard. Thanks for reminding us you have no clue what science is.
 
OK, what are you trying to say? That the Mann graph was not reproducible? You lose, it has been reproduced in every attempt to use proxies to determine the past temperatures for the last 1000 to 2000 years. That CO2 and CH4 are not GHGs? Every measurement of there absorption spectrum has shown that they are. Or are you just trying the denigrate scientists as a class of people. From your prior posts, you know almost nothing of science. You are just as clueless as Silly Billy.
 
OK, what are you trying to say? That the Mann graph was not reproducible? You lose, it has been reproduced in every attempt to use proxies to determine the past temperatures for the last 1000 to 2000 years. That CO2 and CH4 are not GHGs? Every measurement of there absorption spectrum has shown that they are. Or are you just trying the denigrate scientists as a class of people. From your prior posts, you know almost nothing of science. You are just as clueless as Silly Billy.
Why do I bother providing links?

"The 72-page report took the matter a step further in calling the issue a politicization of science.

“Not all irreproducible research is progressive advocacy; not all progressive advocacy is irreproducible; but the intersection between the two is very large. The intersection between the two is a map of much that is wrong with modern science,” the report states."
 
The only people I've ever heard use the words "settled science" are Republicans. I wonder why?


Likely brain infarction? Oddly enough, as a person who READS and REMEMBERS, I've seen the term "settled science" used a hundred times here, and in every case, it was by a Lefty quoting the preponderance of scientists that all agree.

But then what does that really prove? When you become a Lefty, you agree to agree to agree on everything, walking in lockstep with all your mental masters. And if you DON'T agree, then you just don't get hired. It's how progressives survive and spread.

At one time 100% of Europeans all agreed that the world was flat too and that your ship would sail off the edge. So much on agreement. That too was "settled science."
 
The only people I've ever heard use the words "settled science" are Republicans. I wonder why?


Likely brain infarction? Oddly enough, as a person who READS and REMEMBERS, I've seen the term "settled science" used a hundred times here, and in every case, it was by a Lefty quoting the preponderance of scientists that all agree.

But then what does that really prove? When you become a Lefty, you agree to agree to agree on everything, walking in lockstep with all your mental masters. And if you DON'T agree, then you just don't get hired. It's how progressives survive and spread.

At one time 100% of Europeans all agreed that the world was flat too and that your ship would sail off the edge. So much on agreement. That too was "settled science."
Now anyone that would say that is just plain stupid or ignorant, more likely both. Eratosthenes measured the diameter and circumference of the Earth over 2000 years ago. People kept that knowledge alive, even in the face of persecution by the church.
 

Forum List

Back
Top