21 Dec '13 16:22>1 edit
http://phys.org/news/2013-12-koch-brothers-reveals-funders-climate.html
I meant to say global warming deniers. Sorry.
I meant to say global warming deniers. Sorry.
Originally posted by sonhouseYou mean the people who receive funding based on global warming do a study to throw mud on those who oppose them?
http://phys.org/news/2013-12-koch-brothers-reveals-funders-climate.html
I meant to say global warming deniers. Sorry.
Originally posted by Eladar
You mean the people who receive funding based on global warming do a study to throw mud on those who oppose them?
Say it isn't so.
You simply believe who agrees with your worldview on this matter. Since you are old and will die in the next 20 or so years you will never live to see if the gloom and doom is true or not.
You mean the people who receive funding based on global warming
Originally posted by RJHindsSince you claim to be a God fearing sort, do you think God approves of men and women who defile the planet he/she/it created? Think about it because you seem to believe God is going to punish the wicked, which I think just might include you.
I like warm weather.
Originally posted by sasquatch672That s just pure nonsense: Newtonian physics is a very generally applied physics which was never supposed to be forever 'settled' in particular. In fact, Newton himself basically said as much.
There's reason to debate. Recently, the LA Times and Reddit both decided to stop publishing or eliminate the opinions of "deniers".
Climate science is, therefore, the first science to have no further boundaries to explore. Climate science is the first science in the history of mankind where the science is "settled". Newtonian physics isn't settl ...[text shortened]... now how that will turn out. Food from the UN will be distributed by the local warlord in power.
Climate science can be argued to be nothing more than a vast wealth transfer program from industrialized nations to developing nations, so that the middle class in industrialized nations may develop. We all know how that will turn out. Food from the UN will be distributed by the local warlord in power.
Originally posted by humyIt's the strangers to the science forum who tend to reckon themselves the masters of science.
That s just pure nonsense: Newtonian physics is a very generally applied physics which was never supposed to be forever 'settled' in particular. In fact, Newton himself basically said as much.
But very basic physics tells us that CO2 SHOULD cause global warming and, in addition, we have a vast mountain of empirical evidence that proves that it generally does. ...[text shortened]... n for no true science would deny such irrefutable empirical evidence; only a religion does that.
Originally posted by EladarSo in other words, at some point, when a couple of billion people have died from starvation say, 200 years from now, your god will come in and fix all the boo boo's mankind has foisted on itself?
You mean the people who receive funding based on global warming do a study to throw mud on those who oppose them?
Say it isn't so.
You simply believe who agrees with your worldview on this matter. Since you are old and will die in the next 20 or so years you will never live to see if the gloom and doom is true or not.
Originally posted by humyYou mean the people who receive [b]fundingbased on global warming
Originally posted by sonhouseThe odds are with me when I say you won't last 20 more years. Even if you do, your brain probably wont.
So in other words, at some point, when a couple of billion people have died from starvation say, 200 years from now, your god will come in and fix all the boo boo's mankind has foisted on itself?
BTW, don't just count on me kicking off in 20:
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-12-aging-reversed.html#ajTabs
Originally posted by Eladar
Anyone who does not see the conflict of interests here is blind.
Money makes people do strange things. There is big money in global warming and some of the biggest beneficiaries of that money are the people making the claim.
Anyone who does not see the conflict of interests here is blind.
Originally posted by humyDid you not read the link that I gave in my last post?Anyone who does not see the conflict of interests here is blind.
And how exactly does this “conflict of interests” mean that all the data collected, that CLEARLY PROVES CO2-driven global warming is real (which it CLEARLY does ) , is false?
Do you despite the data?
Would you claim all the millions of measurements made INDEPENDENTLY by ...[text shortened]... er temperatures or else” or what exactly?
You’re not making any logical sense here whatsoever.