I did specify applying the methods of science.
And that applies to both sides of the issue. I'm not going to forcast doom and gloom, but I will note that 90 percent of the crap science is on the side of the deniers. The other ten percent is just a matter of overselling when and how much.
90% of the crap science is on the side of the global warming deniers? Where have you been?
What expertise do you have in meteorology that puts you in a position of being able to evaluate the science behind it?
The same as your background in evolution?
[[I’m not going to forcast doom and gloom, but I will note that 90 percent of the crap science is on the side of the deniers.]]
You may want to check your facts on that- And let’s clear this up- Are you asserting that people that doubt that global warming is man made are ‘deniers’? Or are you claiming that those people beleive global warming didn’t happen over 10 years ago? Because if it’s the latter- then you are mistaken about what we who oppose ‘global warming mandates’ are protesting- the FACT is that we are NOT responsible for global warming- it is purely cyclical, follows solar cycles, and htere isn’t a darn hting we can do about it one way or hte other- EPW.Senate.gov has a TON of valid scientific evidence proving we are not responsible- Infact, many of hte original 50+ scientists who wrote up the alarmist IPCC report that the UN is using to try to scare us all into htinking we’re to blame, have since recanted their claims, and have exposed the fact that they werre PRESSURED into making those completely FALSE claims.
You will find all you need on the epw.senate.gov site- You will also find out that even the UN quietly admitted that it’s cyclical and that there’s nothign we can do about it- but by golly the mainstream media completely ignored that confession!
js post 471:I did specify applying the methods of science.
No, you said the FINDINGS of science are found the same by everyone who applies the methods of science, and that is simply not true.
Some things in science are consistent where ever science is done, but science is replete with different FINDINGS by interpreting the evidence and global warming is just one of those examples.
Even with that, there is no consistency in the recording of the temperature data over the years used to determine whether the planet is warming or not.
Global warming deniers are not using crap science. The crappy science is what the global warming alarmists were depending on.
Since you made that comment, is it safe to presume that you buy into global warming?
Remind me again, what field of science is your degree in?