Posted on 04/22/2017 7:52:25 AM PDT by Hojczyk
The March for Science is tomorrow and no one in their right mind would say they are against it because of its name. First of all, you are standing against the right of people to march for whatever cause they wish. Second, you would be portrayed as someone who is against science.
I am all for science. I think the climate changes. It always has and always will. Yet I have been portrayed as anti-science and a climate change “denier” by many who will be marching for things I certainly believe in.
Just who does not believe in science? It’s a straw man the marchers are marching against.
What is questionable is the way science is being portrayed and used. Here is an example. You have seen this a kajillion times; now it’s a kajillion and one.
This shows no apparent linkage between CO2 and temperature in a time scale that goes back millions of years. So as someone who is acquainted with the scientific method, I am instantly skeptical of the idea that after all this time, there is now a linkage. That does not mean there can’t be, and I am open to that argument and understand it. But as I asked in my last blog, how much linkage is there?
What I am trying to figure out is why there is a march when many of the people in that march have no tolerance for the questioning of their position. While I think it’s noble to be inclusive and diverse, are any “skeptics” included as speakers? Is there diversity of thought? Of course not. Because in spite of what you see in the graphs above and below, they ignore the obvious.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotpost.us ...
With Joe B’s and Charlie Daniels’ posts today the forces of sanity are fighting back against insanity!
These people use the Alinski-esque term “denier”, as if the science was settled. Well, the science isn’t settled, so to play along, I suggest a name that ridicules these climate cultists. Perhaps something like “Climate Cultists”?
Cultist is appropriate because the real intent of the movement is hidden from the believers who can’t imagine they are being duped into subjugating themselves.
I never understand, how we got to a point, in which you are a skeptic or climate change denier, if you aren’t on board with global warming.
What of the scientific method, and scientific research? Results of research are decidedly mixed in this area. Yet we are falsely told the science is settled.
And what of the fact that climate has changed on earth for eons? During the last ice age, Chicago was buried under a mile of ice. How did all that ice melt, if not for sustained periods of global warming. Global warming which was caused by natural events in the climate which we may not even be aware of, and certainly have no control over.
Why have the liberals gotten hysterical over this subject?
And, even if global warming is happening, is it all bad news??
For example, the midwest is a fertile agricultural region, but is also subject to severe winters, which cuts short the growing season. Isn’t it possible that warming could increase the production of farm products, lengthening the growing season, thus benefitting all of us, including hungry people in 3rd world countries whom liberals are concerned about????
marketing for
the Climate Cult
is this just another march to protest Trump??? Since the same people who push global warming are horrified as to who is in the White House????
I'm at a hotel in Arlington, Virginia, which is full of people, mostly women, mostly highly-educated (sat next to two female PhDs at breakfast) who have flown in to participate in this farce. Truly, who does not believe in science? Who do they think is anti-science?!
Another March for Marxism.
The March for and by Climate Scientologists
Can you imagine the fun there would be in seeing him take on that fake scientist Bill Nye?
Need more Coffee
Leftist science good - Conservative science bad. Just ask Bill Nye science guy.
Science begins with math & physics, and eventually comes to the point of witch doctoring, which supercedes climatology.
Science is not something to be believed in, it is a method of discerning truth. Global warming does not use the scientific method because it starts with the conclusion and then screens the evidence for facts that only support the conclusion. Anyone who considers all of the evidence is a denier.
The answer to how we got to this point is, as always, follow the money.
Think of government as a socially acceptable mafia that dispenses favors and bribes to whoever the "family" wants to have them. In addition, they hold the power of the gun just like the mafia. Anyone who accepts that government grants is corrupted by the bribe, and if they accept the bribe, they had better deliver the results that the "family" is looking for, or else.
Love Joe’s point that ACTUAL settled science is no longer researched! Freezing point, gravity, etc. LOL. No $$$ in studies for whether gravity is a thing, or to find new evidence that water boils at 100 c.
Need more Coffee
Marching for fake science.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.