You don't say...lol

[daveman]

It's too late now....our children and their children will curse those who could have done something and did nothing.

do what?

 

[SSDD]

How am I different than anyone who a hundred years ago said the science is wrong?

I think skepticism is a good thing. I respect and listen to qualified skeptics that have something else to say. The problem is this has been turned into a partisan issue. You refuse to respect and listen to the opinions of qualified people that disagree with you.

The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..

 

[Confounding]

I don't know what they think

I would bet you 100 grand that they believe AGW is happening.

...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..

Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.

 

[danielpalos]

Shoot out a headline...then try and cover your tracks.

Greenland’s ‘Record Temperature’ denied – the data was wrong

From the “But, but, wait! Our algorithms can adjust for that!” department comes this tale of alarmist woe. Greenland’s all-time record temperature wasn’t a record at all, and it never got above freezing there.

Greenland’s ‘Record Temperature’ denied – the data was wrong

it doesn't matter. climate change happens regardless. we should be upgrading our infrastructure and port cities.

 

[Confounding]

The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..

Science has not become partisan. It doesn't work that way. If there was bullshit floating it would be shot down and buried by other scientists. Scientists the world over are not implicated in a conspiracy to lie to the public. They actually believe this is happening based on what we're capable of understanding so far.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I don't know what they think...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..

Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.

Why should anyone be finding errors in data you say justifies destroying our economy?

 

[SSDD]

If climate science is self-correcting, why does it rely on falsified data?

It doesn't. You just don't understand that our understanding of science evolves over time. There will always be corrections and revisions.

Climate science isn't evolving....in actual science, when a hypothesis experiences a predictive failure, either the hypothesis is scrapped and work begins on a new hypothesis that won't experience predictive failures, or the hypothesis is modified in an effort to prevent future predictive failures...

The scientific landscape of the past 3 decades is literally littered with predictive failures of the greenhouse effect hypothesis and its stepchild, the AGW hypothesis...neither have been modified in the least. The only action taken is to constantly increase the margin of error so that as the predictions and models deviate further and further from reality, they can say that they are still within the margin of error...

In real science a single predictive failure is grounds to toss out a hypothesis or modify it..... in pseudoscience, any number of predictive failures are acceptable so long as the funding continues..

 

[Weatherman2020]

The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..

Science has not become partisan. It doesn't work that way. If there was bullshit floating it would be shot down and buried by other scientists. Scientists the world over are not implicated in a conspiracy to lie to the public. They actually believe this is happening based on what we're capable of understanding so far.

Science has not become partisan.

It is when Democrats call anyone who questions it deniers and morons. As a famous community organizer once said, the science is settled. Or it was until it changed again.

 

[Confounding]

Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.

A consensus is simply a general agreement. There is a consensus in science that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There are a plethora of things that they've come to a consensus on. Do you people not understand what that word means?

 

[Confounding]

It is when Democrats call anyone who questions it deniers and morons. As a famous community organizer once said, the science is settled. Or it was until it changed again.

Al Gore and other Democrats aren't scientists. I think their opinion is about as relevant as yours is.

 

[Weatherman2020]

What did science say a hundred years ago?

I didn't say scientists are never wrong. I said it's absurd to suggest the majority of the most educated minds on Earth have come to a similar conclusion based on no evidence.

I am very familiar with astronomy via friends who are pros in the field. Here’s rule 1 in astronomy: you conform to current thinking or you don’t get telescope time.

I have zero doubt it’s the same bias being pushed in the climate arena.

Do you think astronomers would come to a consensus without evidence?

Astronomers don't come to a consensus for one thing. In the hard sciences, a thing either is, or it isn't. Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.

Exactly. When Einstein submitted the principal of relativity he was way off the charts of thinking of the time. But his science held up to scrutiny and so was accepted.

 

[Weatherman2020]

It is when Democrats call anyone who questions it deniers and morons. As a famous community organizer once said, the science is settled. Or it was until it changed again.

Al Gore and other Democrats aren't scientists. I think their opinion is about as relevant as yours is.

Al Gore and other Democrats aren't scientists. I think their opinion is about as relevant as yours is.

Then you better be mocking them and tell them to F off with the economy.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.

A consensus is simply a general agreement. There is a consensus in science that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There are a plethora of things that they've come to a consensus on. Do you people not understand what that word means?

And there is no consensus on manmade climate change so the science is BS.

 

[westwall]

I don't know what they think

I would bet you 100 grand that they believe AGW is happening.

...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..

Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.

Wrong, every time we point out one of their errors, which are too numerous to keep track of these days, it shows what piss poor scientists they truly are.

 

[Confounding]

Then you better be mocking them

Every day.

 

[Confounding]

we point out one of their errors

Who points out their errors? You? Or is it other climate scientists?

 

[westwall]

Consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.

A consensus is simply a general agreement. There is a consensus in science that the Earth revolves around the Sun. There are a plethora of things that they've come to a consensus on. Do you people not understand what that word means?

No, there is NOT a consensus that the Earth revolves around the Sun, there is SCIENTIFIC AND MEASURABLE PROOF!

Where the hell did you get your so called education!

 

[Weatherman2020]

I don't know what they think

I would bet you 100 grand that they believe AGW is happening.

...my hat is off to them for correcting the error and making the correction public...that is a rarity in climate science over the past 3 decades or so..

Every error and inconsistency you people constantly point to in an attempt to delegitimize climate scientists was uncovered and made public by climate scientists. Scientists want to prove what we think we know wrong. There is not a conspiracy. They'd all love to find significant evidence that proves the majority belief wrong.

This study says man has only a very small part in climate change.

So the science is not settled.

Finland & Japan Confirm Global Warming Data is not Supported

 

[SSDD]

What did science say a hundred years ago?

I didn't say scientists are never wrong. I said it's absurd to suggest the majority of the most educated minds on Earth have come to a similar conclusion based on no evidence.

I am very familiar with astronomy via friends who are pros in the field. Here’s rule 1 in astronomy: you conform to current thinking or you don’t get telescope time.

I have zero doubt it’s the same bias being pushed in the climate arena.

Do you think astronomers would come to a consensus without evidence?

Of course they would...it isn't as if it hasn't happened over and over in the past. It happens in all branches of science...It is interesting that you think a branch of science as a whole is incapable of simply getting it wrong...it has happened over and over and over...why should climate science be exempt.

Here are a few examples of astronomers coming to a consensus based on completely wrong interpretations of what they saw...

You can start with the Ptolomaic system being replaced by Copernicus...

The heliocentric universe was made obsolete by the discovery of the structure of the milky way and an understanding of the red shift of most galaxy's

The Copernican system was made obsolete by Keppler and Isaac Newton

Newtonian gravity was superseded by general relativity

Luminiferous aether theory was superseded but is beginning to make a slow comeback into vogue

The steady state theory which suggested that the universe was in a steady state was superseded by the big bang model which is more and more coming into question

I could go on, but suffice it to say that you can pick practically any topic in science...go back a decade or so and continue to go back and the consensus view changes...except in climate science which is, because of political support, allowed to experience predictive failure after predictive failure and continue on unphased...

 

[westwall]

The "science" itself has become a partisan issue...science can't be rational and political at the same time..

Science has not become partisan. It doesn't work that way. If there was bullshit floating it would be shot down and buried by other scientists. Scientists the world over are not implicated in a conspiracy to lie to the public. They actually believe this is happening based on what we're capable of understanding so far.

Climate science most certainly has become partisan. From the old climate mafia days to the present, if you are not one of the climate mafia you don't get your papers published, you don't get grants etc. And all of that is driven by the progressive lefts desire to use "climate science" to control populations.

It is long on politics but very, very short on science.