Replies

but sir, you used the “majority of scientists” card to support your arguement, i am only expecting that you would be consistant. since you are not consistant in that regard, why would you expect anyone else to be impressed by what the majority of scientists believe on another subject?

and sir, not be a follower of Prophet Gore, you are squarely on the wrong side of at least one heated scientific debate, at least as measured by the majority of scientists.

‘but sir, you used the “majority of scientists” card to support your arguement, i am only expecting that you would be consistant. since you are not consistant in that regard, why would you expect anyone else to be impressed by what the majority of scientists believe on another subject?

and sir, not be a follower of Prophet Gore, you are squarely on the wrong side of at least one heated scientific debate, at least as measured by the majority of scientists.’

Sorry to jump in, but I thought I’d point out one major difference - the debate regarding global warming is a scientific one on both sides. It is not a case of one side claiming “the Intelligent Cooler is going to cool things off, don’t worry about those newfangled satellite measurements”.

The thing about global warming is to keep your eye on BOTH important questions: “Is there a global climatic warming trend?” and (assuming the answer to the first question is ‘yes’) “Is the warming trend primarily caused by man (anthropogenic)?”. I’m very curious how the environmental groups will respond if it turns out that warming is real, but not caused by humans.

but sir, you used the “majority of scientists” card to support your arguement, i am only expecting that you would be consistant. since you are not consistant in that regard, why would you expect anyone else to be impressed by what the majority of scientists believe on another subject?

There you go jumping to conclusions again. You assume I follow evolution merely because of the number of people who agree with it and not because the evidence supporting it. If science were merely a popularity contest then I'd be on your side with the creationism supporters because of recent poll information. So I'm sorry to disappoint you but no, I don't belive in what you would no doubt define global warming as. And no, I don't believe the earth is 6000 years old. And no, I don't believe that the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood. And no, I don't disagree with any of those merely because of the number of people who have taken the same position I have. And no, I have no idea why you would agree with any of that and I care even less.

Clearer now?