04 Jul '17 15:28>
Originally posted by humySince you're a little unsure of what science is, exactly, let me assure you that my scientific cred is at least more solid than yours.
Strawman; Nobody denies there are natural causes to climate change; that doesn't imply there cannot be man made changes as the two can without contradiction occur TOGETHER as in at the same time.
So I see like MetalBrain you ignore what the science says and have blind faith in wishful thinking the whole thing is just one vast global conspiracy.
See below ...[text shortened]... evidence, which even by itself is overwhelming.
FreakyKBH; what are your science credentials?
Unlike you, I do not treat science as anything more than what it is, i.e., an "intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment."
There isn't a shred of indoctrination or religious overtones to my handling of science; rather, I limit my opinions on what can be proved scientifically--- with data which can be verified.
The speculation to which the global warming alarmists must resort to removes their work from science and deposits the same in the realm of religion.
Ain't nobody got time for that.
If the planet has been demonstrably warmer during periods of time wherein man's activities had zero impact, it is safe to conclude that mean temperatures are a result of something other than human activity.
If people who study geology, meteorology and other earth sciences as a matter of course for their livelihood are in disagreement over what the datum means, who are you to emphatically declare the state of things one way or another?
Your opinion carries no more weight than a sports fan on Monday morning who insists the team should have gone for it on third and long in the early parts of the fourth quarter: nil.