Creationism and Climate Change

[SwimExpert]

It may interest you to know that CO2 is a marginal factor in the greenhouse effect. In fact, 75% of the greenhouse effect is caused by water. Who am I kidding? You won't be interested in that. You just want to talk about CO2.

You're an idiot. Read message #89. You're a prime example of a little knowledge being dangerous.

Faced with facts you can't refute, and BAM! you turn abusive.

 

[konradv]

Faced with facts you can't refute, and BAM! you turn abusive.

Faced with the fact that you posted an untruth, you ignored it. FYI, I considered your attitude about what I might or might not be interested to be abusive, considering that you don't know much about the topic and are merely parroting what others have said. As far as I can see you haven't posted anything I can't refute. Try it and see.

 

[SwimExpert]

Faced with facts you can't refute, and BAM! you turn abusive.

Faced with the fact that you posted an untruth, you ignored it. FYI, I considered your attitude about what I might or might not be interested to be abusive, considering that you don't know much about the topic and are merely parroting what others have said. As far as I can see you haven't posted anything I can't refute. Try it and see.

Scurry and scamper along now. Your entire argument has fallen apart, don't let the roof fall on your head too.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Because they're citizens, with as much right to be considered as you have?

Just a guess, off the top of my head.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Serious question: According to evolutionists, what started it all? What do they think was the beginning that everything evolved from? There had to be matter in some form in order to have something evolve. So, where did that original matter come from?

Serious answer: their entire explanation appears to be, "Whoops!"

 

[Cecilie1200]

There has to be something from which theory is based.

The theory of evolution is based on observation and evidence.

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

 

[SwimExpert]

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

And?

 

[SwimExpert]

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

And?

Did you observe that?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

And?

Did you observe that?

I saw the bones. Didn't see them doing anything other than lying there. Do you have a point, and is it going to enter the conversation anytime soon?

 

[Flopper]

CO2, the only molecule that "Absorbs energy"

Frank lies again!!! Nobody said that, but that's irrelevant to those pushing the denier position.

The vast majority of the AGW crowd do focus singularly on CO2, and attribute it as the only relevant factor. Do you deny this?

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

No, just natural science. No problem with applied sciences that benefit them.

 

[PredFan]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

 

[Flopper]

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

And?

Did you observe that?

I saw the bones. Didn't see them doing anything other than lying there. Do you have a point, and is it going to enter the conversation anytime soon?

You just saw bones carbon dated at 3.18 millions old.

 

[SwimExpert]

Really? Who was it that observed evolution actually happening? I don't know anyone billions of years old. Do you?

And?

Did you observe that?

I saw the bones. Didn't see them doing anything other than lying there. Do you have a point, and is it going to enter the conversation anytime soon?

So yes, you observed the bones. You've observed a piece of history, which dates back millions of years. Of course, you weren't alive back then, nor was any human alive back then. But we can still observe elements of history from times when we weren't even alive.

You are arguing from a position of scientific ignorance. You don't know the science, and you reject any science that you don't happen to agree with in the first place. You are exactly the kind of person that the AGW crowd feeds off of, and are a big part of the problem as to why those of us who have sensible objections to AGW theory have so much difficulty getting through to sensible people who end up buying into AGW theory. There are perfectly valid scientific reasons to object to AGW, and we don't need the ignorant likes of you to muddy up the waters.

 

[westwall]

CO2, the only molecule that "Absorbs energy"

Frank lies again!!! Nobody said that, but that's irrelevant to those pushing the denier position.

The vast majority of the AGW crowd do focus singularly on CO2, and attribute it as the only relevant factor. Do you deny this?

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The energy is inbound anyway, correct? So unless CO2 some magical power to pull in additional energy, why difference does it's "energy absorption" make in the overall equation?

It's like throwing on an extra blanket to stop the outgoing energy.

It stops the energy? Does it balloon up like a toad?

 

[Flopper]

Frank lies again!!! Nobody said that, but that's irrelevant to those pushing the denier position.

The vast majority of the AGW crowd do focus singularly on CO2, and attribute it as the only relevant factor. Do you deny this?

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

Zero emission motor vehicles, high efficiency electrical devices, and sustainable fuel sources don't require we return to the stone age. In fact, just the opposite is true. A society that becomes more efficient is a society that will be more productive.

 

[Discombobulated]

Frank lies again!!! Nobody said that, but that's irrelevant to those pushing the denier position.

The vast majority of the AGW crowd do focus singularly on CO2, and attribute it as the only relevant factor. Do you deny this?

Science of any kind conflicts with their way of thinking because they are primarily motivated by faith.

Says the person who supports the complete Luddization of the planet in support of a theory that has failed. There is nothing but computer models to support the "theory" that CO2 governs global temps. The actual real science on the subject shows categorically that that theory has failed. But you anti science religious nutters will keep pushing it in a
vain attempt to gain control of the various peoples of this world.

You clowns are religious extremists in every way. You have your high priests, you have your scriptures, you have your religious fundamentalists, and you have the desire to murder anyone who stands in your way. Just like some other religious fanatics we know.

Luddization? I have no idea what you're babbling about.

One of the more ridiculous religious groups of the last 300 years were the Luddites who believed that technology was evil. Thus they destroyed machinery whenever they were able to do so. You AGW cultists are the modern day Luddites. You feel that mankind needs to devolve back to a more pastoral existence and strive for "sustainability".

The problem with sustainable societies is they work fine till there is a disaster, then they die.

Thank you for telling me what I believe. I was confused at first but now you've clarified everything.

 

[Discombobulated]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

Meh, liberals deny the facts of Forensic Science, how can we trust them on ANY science?

To be clear, I believe in evolution and Climate Change. What I don't believe in is the garbage that man has anything to do with climate.

It doesn't matter what science you believe or don't believe......fortunately we have real scientists to interpret the data for us.

 

[ninja007]

Polls show that an astounding 42% of Americans literally believe in the Biblical story of creation, rejecting the science of evolution. There seems to be a very close correlation between these people and folks who deny the facts of climate change. Since they reject the undeniable scientific fundamentals of evolution how can anyone take them seriously on any issue concerning science? Why would their opinions matter?

In U.S. 42 Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

it is not that cut and dry. I believe in both. God and evolution.