Pretty Well Sums It Up

[Kathianne]

http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Climate-Change-Resized.jpg

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/the-climate-change-scam-brilliantly-summed-up-in-one-cartoon

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Climate-Change-Resized.jpg

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/the-climate-change-scam-brilliantly-summed-up-in-one-cartoon

40 YEARS OF LYING PROPAGANDA.
1970-- 2014..
SPEARHEADED PRIMARILY BY THE DEM PARTY.
I remember back in 1970 High School teacher screaming--GLOBAL COOLING GOING TO WIPE OUT
TWO-THIRDS MANKIND IN THE NEXT 30/40 YEARS.
It was late August in the South --I laughed at her , she got pissed off.
She called me on it-insisted that I explain what was funny.
I did..
I stated, they can not accurately tell you the weather forecast for next month, nor if it will rain next week--however they can predict climate change 20/40 years out, which to me is preposterous.
She then told the class to write a short essay on the subject, turn it in the next day.
We did, I was the only one rejecting the prediction--She gave me a D+ ON MY ESSAY THAT USED
LOGIC, COMMON SENSE AND SCIENCE TO DEFEAT THAT STUPID PROPAGANDA.
I told her in about 15/20 years I'd look her up for an apology.
Never got to as I heard after moving to Florida a decade later, she died in car wreck if memory serves
me correct on that .. Sad to hear but....
I really wanted to say--I told you so.... I still do.... :laugh:--Tyr

[pete311]

It's cute you base your opinion from cartoons.

[aboutime]

It's cute you base your opinion from cartoons.


As do YOU pete. The only thing missing is the cartoon behind whoever types for you.

[pete311]

As do YOU pete. The only thing missing is the cartoon behind whoever types for you.

Jokes and cartoons. Nice!

[jimnyc]

It's cute you base your opinion from cartoons.

Are the cartoons really that far fetched? Did we not hear that crap over the years? Have any of them panned out to reality?

[NightTrain]

It's cute you base your opinion from cartoons.

Do you dispute the message?

[Gunny]

40 YEARS OF LYING PROPAGANDA.
1970-- 2014..
SPEARHEADED PRIMARILY BY THE DEM PARTY.
I remember back in 1970 High School teacher screaming--GLOBAL COOLING GOING TO WIPE OUT
TWO-THIRDS MANKIND IN THE NEXT 30/40 YEARS.
It was late August in the South --I laughed at her , she got pissed off.
She called me on it-insisted that I explain what was funny.
I did..
I stated, they can not accurately tell you the weather forecast for next month, nor if it will rain next week--however they can predict climate change 20/40 years out, which to me is preposterous.
She then told the class to write a short essay on the subject, turn it in the next day.
We did, I was the only one rejecting the prediction--She gave me a D+ ON MY ESSAY THAT USED
LOGIC, COMMON SENSE AND SCIENCE TO DEFEAT THAT STUPID PROPAGANDA.
I told her in about 15/20 years I'd look her up for an apology.
Never got to as I heard after moving to Florida a decade later, she died in car wreck if memory serves
me correct on that .. Sad to hear but....
I really wanted to say--I told you so.... I still do.... :laugh:--Tyr

Be nice if someone would send some of that MY way. I'm from S Texas. I've spent two years waiting on summer here on I-40. All these damned yankees and their big mouthes have NO idea what heat is.:slap:

[jimnyc]

All these damned yankees and their big mouthes have NO idea what heat is.:slap:

BURN!!! :laugh:

[Gunny]

BURN!!! :laugh:

Uh huh. I was tooling around in shorts and sandals last weekend. You were looking for your snow shovel. :laugh:

[Kathianne]

Uh huh. I was tooling around in shorts and sandals last weekend. You were looking for your snow shovel. :laugh:

It was up to 89 the other day, almost getting hot. ;)

Last night it rained, it's cooled up some. Probably 65 or so at 8 am.

[Gunny]

It was up to 89 the other day, almost getting hot. ;)

Last night it rained, it's cooled up some. Probably 65 or so at 8 am.

Yeah, thanks. Your rain moved east. It's right outside my damned door. And for the so-called desert, someone needs to get the memo. It's always raining, windy and cold here. What the crap. My idea of desert is 115 degrees, no clouds in the sky, and the ground is sand. Not here. Oh hell no. Everything is weird here. The ground is some kind of weird-ass dirt, and it rains a lot and weird stuff grows in it.

I'm thinking it must be the UFOs. :laugh:

[pete311]

Are the cartoons really that far fetched? Did we not hear that crap over the years? Have any of them panned out to reality?

I refuse to believe you are this daft. The cartoon suggests that those statements were scientific consensus at those dates which is patently false. Certainly there were reports and news items with similar statements, but so what. I can find you a news item today how Big Foot has been sighted. Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong. Look at science history man. This is extreme biased cherry picking.

[Gunny]

I refuse to believe you are this daft. The cartoon suggests that those statements were scientific consensus at those dates which is patently false. Certainly there were reports and news items with similar statements, but so what. I can find you a news item today how Big Foot has been sighted. Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong. Look at science history man. This is extreme biased cherry picking.

Ummm ... they're cartoons? They're supposed to be funny. Jim might be a lot of dumbass in one bag but he's not unintelligent. Most of us prefer to overlook the retarded suggestions and just laugh the joke/irony of the cartoon. I'm too logical. I rarely got Farside. Their idea of humor was beyond me. But lots of people loved it. I didn't bother pissing on their parade. Lots of people like cake too. I won't eat the sh*t. Doesn't mean someone else can't have it. I just wouldn't give them one if they were gay. :laugh:

[Gunny]

I refuse to believe you are this daft. The cartoon suggests that those statements were scientific consensus at those dates which is patently false. Certainly there were reports and news items with similar statements, but so what. I can find you a news item today how Big Foot has been sighted. Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong. Look at science history man. This is extreme biased cherry picking.

And before you get your balls in an uproar, I ain't defending Jim. He doesn't need any help. I'm Mother Freakin' Teresa compared to him when he gets mad. I'm just going for the entertainment value here. I've been bored all day. No kid. Doing chores and lifting weights. So you go right ahead and keep pulling his string. I got two boxes of popcorn. :laugh:

[Abbey Marie]

I refuse to believe you are this daft. The cartoon suggests that those statements were scientific consensus at those dates which is patently false. Certainly there were reports and news items with similar statements, but so what. I can find you a news item today how Big Foot has been sighted. Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong. Look at science history man. This is extreme biased cherry picking.

Which is exactly why you don't make policy decisions based on unsettled "science".

Unless you're daft, of course.

[pete311]

Ummm ... they're cartoons? They're supposed to be funny.

It's pretty obvious it's not being used as pure humor but as a political and scientific statement.

[Gunny]

It's pretty obvious it's not being used as pure humor but as a political and scientific statement.

Bet you're lots of fun at a party.:rolleyes: Political humor has been around for centuries. Learn to see the humor inside, not just some political message you're looking for.

[pete311]

Which is exactly why you don't make policy decisions based on unsettled "science".

Unless you're daft, of course.

How do you define settled science? I can link you to a dozen scientists that refute our mainstream understanding of gravity. Furthermore we don't understand how gravity works at the quantum level. Should we not base policy on our unsettled understanding of gravity?

[pete311]

Bet you're lots of fun at a party.:rolleyes: Political humor has been around for centuries. Learn to see the humor inside, not just some political message you're looking for.

You tell me Tyr-Ziu-Saxnot's response was one of humor. Give me a break.

[Gunny]

You tell me Tyr-Ziu-Saxnot's response was one of humor. Give me a break.

I think he's funny as sh*t. If I want a war I'll start one. I don't need to use someone else's words as an excuse. You cain't read between the lines. So let met draw you a picture. I like tyr. He's a good ol' boy. You on the other hand are a stick in the mud. Don't make me choose sides here. You and that other fuckwit tailfins need to learn how to read people. Tyr loves his poetry and everything he writes is in prose. Big deal. His political opinions are no worse than yours.

At least he has a personality. You don't. You think everything is as serious as a heart attack. Lighten up, Ajax.

And if you want to get started, these guys are all nice fella's compared to me. I'll kill anything that moves.

[Abbey Marie]

How do you define settled science? I can link you to a dozen scientists that refute our mainstream understanding of gravity. Furthermore we don't understand how gravity works at the quantum level. Should we not base policy on our unsettled understanding of gravity?

Yes, because gravity and global warming are equally unsettled. :rolleyes:

[NightTrain]

It's pretty obvious it's not being used as pure humor but as a political and scientific statement.

No.

It's making fun of you and your buddies who run around claiming that the earth is going to erupt into a molten fireball - or it's going to become one gigantic glacier.

You can't decide which direction we're going to suddenly lurch to, but that doesn't stop you from screaming bloody murder about it.

In the meantime, as the earth continues to spin, the cartoon illustrates how most of us view your crowd : Silly hippies spouting the same nonsense year after year, and nothing ever comes to fruition.


http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8714&stc=1

[aboutime]

pete. You wanna discuss settled science? Here's one answer not even you can dispute.

If any of us here TELL you to shut up, or ASK you to shut up. Settled Science, predictably says...

YOU WON'T SHUT UP. Because YOU are incapable of not having the LAST WORD. Proven Science.:laugh:

[DLT]

Be nice if someone would send some of that MY way. I'm from S Texas. I've spent two years waiting on summer here on I-40. All these damned yankees and their big mouthes have NO idea what heat is.:slap:

I'll take the Texas heat over that crappy/chappy ass cold and sleet they have up north ANY day. At least with the heat you can still get out and go somewhere. Up there you get snowed in when you need to be somewhere. No thanks.

[Kathianne]

Ok Gunny, DLT,

If you guys are getting my weather a few hours later, the temps dropped about 10 degrees in early afternoon. Spotty thundershowers. Temps rising again. ;)

[Voted4Reagan]

I refuse to believe you are this daft. The cartoon suggests that those statements were scientific consensus at those dates which is patently false. Certainly there were reports and news items with similar statements, but so what. I can find you a news item today how Big Foot has been sighted. Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong. Look at science history man. This is extreme biased cherry picking.

I remember those arguments from the 70's to the present...

The statements are actually statements made by climatology "EXPERTS" for the last nearly 50 years.

They all supposedly had DATA to back them up...

Just that they have been wrong at every turn...

[Abbey Marie]

Whenever science seeks to prove a political point, watch out.

[Kathianne]

Whenever science seeks to prove a political point, watch out.

Yep, the 'science' of climate change has all been about money and taxes and politics.

No one has denied that temps have gone up very slightly or that they cooled slightly for periods in the recent past. The 'unsettled' part is whether or not human behaviors are causing and what if anything can or should be done.

Couple that with the altered data to prove the 'settled' and progressive agendas including targeting fossil fuel based industries, propping up 'green technologies,' and the unemployment and costs increases that have resulted and there's reasons to hate politicians and the lying left.

[Gunny]

Ok Gunny, DLT,

If you guys are getting my weather a few hours later, the temps dropped about 10 degrees in early afternoon. Spotty thundershowers. Temps rising again. ;)


And it sucks. I'm used to running around in shorts in April.

[Abbey Marie]

Watching a Science Channel show on the universe, and a physicist just remarked how much our understanding of the universe is changing. Yet every step along the way our damn-sure scientists have told us they are certain how the world works. C'mon Pete, stop dreaming that everything they tell you is truth.

ETA: Oh, and just delivered in a cute Brit accent in an ad for an upcoming show about Space: "We've been looking at things completely wrong until now".

:poke:

[Russ]

No.

It's making fun of you and your buddies who run around claiming that the earth is going to erupt into a molten fireball - or it's going to become one gigantic glacier.

You can't decide which direction we're going to suddenly lurch to, but that doesn't stop you from screaming bloody murder about it.

In the meantime, as the earth continues to spin, the cartoon illustrates how most of us view your crowd : Silly hippies spouting the same nonsense year after year, and nothing ever comes to fruition.



Amen. These "climatologist" scientists can't make up their minds, but get mad if you don't believe everything they say. I remember all the predictions of global cooling and the planet freezing. I also remember less than 10 years ago when these pretentious scientists were using the term "global warming". Then they sheepishly decided to morph that term into "climate change" when they noticed that much of the planet was actually getting colder winters, or even colder weather entirely. And they pretended like that was what they had expected all along.

Here's my quote of the day: "Climate scientists - often wrong, but always sure"

[Voted4Reagan]

Amen. These "climatologist" scientists can't make up their minds, but get mad if you don't believe everything they say. I remember all the predictions of global cooling and the planet freezing. I also remember less than 10 years ago when these pretentious scientists were using the term "global warming". Then they sheepishly decided to morph that term into "climate change" when they noticed that much of the planet was actually getting colder winters, or even colder weather entirely. And they pretended like that was what they had expected all along.

Here's my quote of the day: "Climate scientists - often wrong, but always sure"


Aren't you supposed to be giving your lovely lady a Pedicure right now? Or doing Laundry?

Back to the Housework Huckleberry...

:slap::poke::beer:

[Gunny]

Aren't you supposed to be giving your lovely lady a Pedicure right now? Or doing Laundry?

Back to the Housework Huckleberry...

:slap::poke::beer:

Stir the pot much, do ya? :laugh2:

[Russ]

Aren't you supposed to be giving your lovely lady a Pedicure right now? Or doing Laundry?

Back to the Housework Huckleberry...

:slap::poke::beer:


Hmmm... I could probably be saying the same thing back atcha... :cool:

[Gunny]

Hmmm... I could probably be saying the same thing back atcha... :cool:

Easily. I almost can't wait for Jim or Jeff to log on. :laugh2:

[Abbey Marie]

Russ makes me happy in other ways.

[Drummond]

I refuse to believe you are this daft. The cartoon suggests that those statements were scientific consensus at those dates which is patently false. Certainly there were reports and news items with similar statements, but so what. I can find you a news item today how Big Foot has been sighted. Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong. Look at science history man. This is extreme biased cherry picking.

Really, Pete ? Well, it doesn't do a lot to prove it RIGHT, either ... eh ?

If the 'overall science' doesn't fit, or create worthwhile prognostications made on its behalf .. then WHY maintain any degree of faith in it ? Because Al Gore (Leftie) tells you to ... ??

[Gunny]

Russ makes me happy in other ways.

You don't get a say in this one. :slap:

[Little-Acorn]

Many predictions are wrong, many scientists have been wrong, that doesn't make the overall science wrong.
And this from someone who complains that OTHERS use cartoon-like dialogue to make a point.

[Voted4Reagan]

Hmmm... I could probably be saying the same thing back atcha... :cool:

Sent her out for the Pedicure....

I got the Laundry tomorrow

[Gunny]

Sent her out for the Pedicure....

I got the Laundry tomorrow

Screw you. Laundry was today. Damned dishes tomorrow early tomorrow AM. :slap:

[pete311]

Watching a Science Channel show on the universe, and a physicist just remarked how much our understanding of the universe is changing. Yet every step along the way our damn-sure scientists have told us they are certain how the world works. C'mon Pete, stop dreaming that everything they tell you is truth.

ETA: Oh, and just delivered in a cute Brit accent in an ad for an upcoming show about Space: "We've been looking at things completely wrong until now".

:poke:

Science is always refining itself, yes, that is the amazing part of science and why we have the technologies we have today. What is your point? Of course we are scratching the surface of understanding the universe, but you act like we know nothing. Look around you. The world is built from science.

[pete311]

Really, Pete ? Well, it doesn't do a lot to prove it RIGHT, either ... eh ?

If the 'overall science' doesn't fit, or create worthwhile prognostications made on its behalf .. then WHY maintain any degree of faith in it ? Because Al Gore (Leftie) tells you to ... ??

The prophesying of future events is always tricky and not always scientific. I am not always a fan of it.

Some of you mix politics with the science. You disagree with the politics and then lump the science into it. I care not for the politics. Don't drag the scientists into it.

[Gunny]

Science is always refining itself, yes, that is the amazing part of science and why we have the technologies we have today. What is your point? Of course we are scratching the surface of understanding the universe, but you act like we know nothing. Look around you. The world is built from science.

The world is because it's man's understanding based on the restrictions of man's knowledge. That does NOT mean the universe is under the same rules. People crack me up on this topic.

You want to believe in scientific theory but not God when there's as much evidence to support one as the other. Once science turns to conjecture it's just another religion. The only conclusion I have come up with is why people would choose scientific theory over God is they just don't want to have to answer to Him in the end and delude themselves into thinking they can opt out with a bunch of lame crap that sounds worse than a religion.

[pete311]

The only conclusion I have come up with is why people would choose scientific theory over God is they just don't want to have to answer to Him in the end and delude themselves into thinking they can opt out with a bunch of lame crap that sounds worse than a religion.

hmmm or maybe because they don't want to die from Polio... Did God make that Polio vaccine? You do realize that you are typing on a machine that implements hundreds of years of scientific theory, right?

Religion didn't need to come into this debate. You brought it in needlessly.

[Drummond]

hmmm or maybe because they don't want to die from Polio... Did God make that Polio vaccine? You do realize that you are typing on a machine that implements hundreds of years of scientific theory, right?

Religion didn't need to come into this debate. You brought it in needlessly.

.. and tell me .. what made the very creation of the matter that you, I, all our computers, EVERYTHING in fact, possible ?

Science has no ultimate explanation for any of it, much less actual proof.

Who, or what, gave YOU the ability to produce one coherent (however thoroughly misguided) thought, Pete ? Because if it was God ... if God made us all capable of intelligent thought ... then, Pete, however indirectly, God DID make 'that polio vaccine ...' ...

.. chew on that one, my son ...

[pete311]

Who, or what, gave YOU the ability to produce one coherent (however thoroughly misguided) thought, Pete ? Because if it was God ... if God made us all capable of intelligent thought ... then, Pete, however indirectly, God DID make 'that polio vaccine ...' ...

.. chew on that one, my son ...

Then God did so using scientific theory. Scientists didn't learn the laws of physics from a tablet on a mountain. Chew on that.

[fj1200]

Religion didn't need to come into this debate. You brought it in needlessly.


.. and tell me .. what made the very creation of the matter that you, I, all our computers, EVERYTHING in fact, possible ?

Science is science and God is God.

[fj1200]

Then God did so using scientific theory. Scientists didn't learn the laws of physics from a tablet on a mountain. Chew on that.

Umm, God created the scientific theory. :poke:

[Drummond]

Then God did so using scientific theory. Scientists didn't learn the laws of physics from a tablet on a mountain. Chew on that.

What is the origin of all the 'laws' the physical Universe operates by, Pete ? By whose DESIGN were they created .. and with such sophistication that today's best minds are STILL trying to grasp it all .. ????

Whatever mind was responsible, it was obviously 'pre-Universe'. Or, pre EVERYTHING we regard as defining the very boundaries of our own existence. In other words ... ONLY a GOD could possibly qualify .... yes ?

Chew on THAT ....

[pete311]

What is the origin of all the 'laws' the physical Universe operates by, Pete ? By whose DESIGN were they created .. and with such sophistication that today's best minds are STILL trying to grasp it all .. ????

Whatever mind was responsible, it was obviously 'pre-Universe'. Or, pre EVERYTHING we regard as defining the very boundaries of our own existence. In other words ... ONLY a GOD could possibly qualify .... yes ?

Chew on THAT ....

I haven't the foggiest idea what you are blathering about here. What does this have to do with scientists using scientific theory? Clearly you have not read a history book.

I feel like you are claiming we don't have free will? Everything has been determined? No one but God is responsible for everything? Even Evil? Even still the fact remains that scientists controlled by God used scientific theory to create our modern world.

[Drummond]

I haven't the foggiest idea what you are blathering about here. What does this have to do with scientists using scientific theory? Clearly you have not read a history book.

I feel like you are claiming we don't have free will? Everything has been determined? No one but God is responsible for everything? Even Evil? Even still the fact remains that scientists controlled by God used scientific theory to create our modern world.

Talking of 'reading a book' ... has it occurred to you that scientists, inventing scientific theory and then trying to make it fit into reality, are akin to someone not only trying to read a book, but trying to learn the language it was written in ?

The 'book' is the Universe, and all that comprises it. Scientists are merely coming up with theories which fit their understanding of what they're trying to 'read'. The 'language' of existence is already determined, and completely written. Scientists are nothing more than stumbling translators of it, far from expert, learning as they go.

Do we have free will ? How do any of us determine if we do ? BUT ... by the same token, how do any of us determine that we DON'T ?

Scientists are welcome to try and come up with scientific theory that can get to the truth of THAT ... except of course, that they have no possible way of doing so, either way. Do they ?? So ... scientific theory has its drawbacks !! It cannot possibly - confidently - settle on the WHOLE truth of existence.

Ah, but, believe in God, and all that He says ... and, you plug some gaps. Don't you ?

Still chewing, Pete ?

[DLT]

Ok Gunny, DLT,

If you guys are getting my weather a few hours later, the temps dropped about 10 degrees in early afternoon. Spotty thundershowers. Temps rising again. ;)

I got lucky ....the bad storms and golf ball sized hail missed my area (went further north to Allen and Denton). Just a little drizzle this am, cool and cloudy today. I'm thinking tomorrow it will be bright and clear again.

[pete311]

Talking of 'reading a book' ... has it occurred to you that scientists, inventing scientific theory and then trying to make it fit into reality, are akin to someone not only trying to read a book, but trying to learn the language it was written in ?

The 'book' is the Universe, and all that comprises it. Scientists are merely coming up with theories which fit their understanding of what they're trying to 'read'. The 'language' of existence is already determined, and completely written. Scientists are nothing more than stumbling translators of it, far from expert, learning as they go.


And somehow they managed to land a man on the moon, create us 4K LED TVs, electric cars, F-22 fighter jets, control nuclear power, GPS mapping, organ transplants, brain implants, vaccines, DNA editing but yeah we really don't know what we're doing. Dumb luck! Do you live in a cave? Are you caught up on modern advances?



It cannot possibly - confidently - settle on the WHOLE truth of existence.


In the meantime I'll keep my 4K TV and fiber optic internet, you keep your God.

If you are anti-science why they hell are you using a computer? Scientists are just guessing that it won't blow up in your face and kill you. Why would you trust them?

[DLT]

And it sucks. I'm used to running around in shorts in April.

I've been in shorts most of April already. Finally had to put on long pants today since it's a bit rainy and cooler. Back to shorts tomorrow tho! (yay!)

[Kathianne]

I got lucky ....the bad storms and golf ball sized hail missed my area (went further north to Allen and Denton). Just a little drizzle this am, cool and cloudy today. I'm thinking tomorrow it will be bright and clear again.
Likely, 80's today. ;)

[Gunny]

I've been in shorts most of April already. Finally had to put on long pants today since it's a bit rainy and cooler. Back to shorts tomorrow tho! (yay!)

I hear ya. I wish this crap would just do one thing or the other and knock off this Springtime crap. I'm used to SA heat, not this I-40 stuff. I waited all last summer for summer, listening to people complaining about how hot they thought it was. They got NO idea what hot is.:laugh:

[Drummond]

This is too easy ... !! ....


And somehow they managed to land a man on the moon, create us 4K LED TVs, electric cars, F-22 fighter jets, control nuclear power, GPS mapping, organ transplants, brain implants, vaccines, DNA editing but yeah we really don't know what we're doing. Dumb luck! Do you live in a cave? Are you caught up on modern advances?

Yes, they did. And .. they did ALL of that, using materials, within a physical Universe operating on finite rules and specifications which scream 'DESIGN' ... because all that was there in the first place, just waiting to be utilised. Scientists took much time, within their respective fields, to slowly but surely make the necessary conceptual advances which they could translate into something workable.

Landing a man on the Moon ... an astronomical body of finite structure, finite properties, orbiting in a set orbit .. all of these factors pre-set, regardless of scientific interest and study. The materials, technologies, everything that went into making the Moon flight possible, landing and return ditto, thanks to pre-set laws and existing materials which could then be translated into the creation of the reality of such a journey !

The very same is true of every other example you've supplied. NONE of those would be possible if pre-set laws of physics hadn't been discovered, translated into something workable, to create into things ... to be superseded in the future by other things far less primitive, as yet MORE of our reality is translated and converted into utilities ?

I say again: scientists are mere translators of a pre-set, designed, reality. They learn as they go. They're still learning, still building, still advancing .. much as children progress along a process of education in their lives.

You consign your total faith, if you insist, to the bumbling 'learn-as-we-go' minds who no doubt perceive rather less than they THINK they do of our reality. Me ... I'll go further, and have faith in the Creator of it all, thanks very much ...


In the meantime I'll keep my 4K TV and fiber optic internet, you keep your God.

Since God is the source of all reality, you cannot help but keep BOTH .. whether you like it, or not.


If you are anti-science why they hell are you using a computer? Scientists are just guessing that it won't blow up in your face and kill you. Why would you trust them?

Unless I'm mistaken, not every computer ever built has been safe to use ??

Besides, I'm not anti-science. Far from it. I simply recognise the realities of what they do, and achieve, and how limited science ultimately is, rather more completely than you do yourself.

[Elessar]

It's pretty obvious it's not being used as pure humor but as a political and scientific statement.

O.K...

Gotta ask you:

Why do you always respond like a spoiled spoon-pounding brat?

In your liberal nature to get butt-hurt all the frikkin time?

[Elessar]

hmmm or maybe because they don't want to die from Polio... Did God make that Polio vaccine? You do realize that you are typing on a machine that implements hundreds of years of scientific theory, right?

Religion didn't need to come into this debate. You brought it in needlessly.

And you are all over the map...

Could not follow you if you were on a leash.

[aboutime]

And somehow they managed to land a man on the moon, create us 4K LED TVs, electric cars, F-22 fighter jets, control nuclear power, GPS mapping, organ transplants, brain implants, vaccines, DNA editing but yeah we really don't know what we're doing. Dumb luck! Do you live in a cave? Are you caught up on modern advances?



In the meantime I'll keep my 4K TV and fiber optic internet, you keep your God.

If you are anti-science why they hell are you using a computer? Scientists are just guessing that it won't blow up in your face and kill you. Why would you trust them?


pete. Little did you know how many of those same scientists would probably identify your problems as unknown, and a major cause of possible brain malfunction due to constant, personal feelings of being identified as a jerk. They call it something like a Lunar Happening.

[Russ]

And somehow they managed to land a man on the moon, create us 4K LED TVs, electric cars, F-22 fighter jets, control nuclear power, GPS mapping, organ transplants, brain implants, vaccines, DNA editing but yeah we really don't know what we're doing. Dumb luck! Do you live in a cave? Are you caught up on modern advances?

In the meantime I'll keep my 4K TV and fiber optic internet, you keep your God.

If you are anti-science why they hell are you using a computer? Scientists are just guessing that it won't blow up in your face and kill you. Why would you trust them?

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

[Gunny]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

Here's MY favorite: How do you have a "Big Bang Theory" which creates something from nothing when scientific law says you cannot?

[Black Diamond]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

God will be proven not to exist. And then people will stand before him. It will be quite the sight to see.

[pete311]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

Man you guys are lame. When did this turn into a anti God thread? Gunny started the God crap. He was just ragging on scientific theory which has nothing to do with God. Please let's drop it.

The second law applies to a closed system. Are we living in a closed system? That is high school physics. You guys are like Jon Snow. You know nothing.

[pete311]

I say again: scientists are mere translators of a pre-set, designed, reality. They learn as they go. They're still learning, still building, still advancing

Regardless if it's preset design reality, scientists are still discovering it's process by the scientific method and theories. Do you think scientists get a tablet from a mountain every morning?

[darin]

Pete, I'm not sure why you seem to think the impressive scientific achievements are some kind of proof against the existence of God. Or that we have to choose between TV/Internet-access and God. I firmly believe in God, and my TV and wireless router are both still working fine.

Here's a question for you: how do you reconcile the Theory of Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics? Evolution is a theory that simple life organisms can 'evolve' on their own into much more complex life organisms. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything, down to the atomic level, will always move toward greater disorder - unless acted upon by an outside force. They are contradictory. Which one do you believe?

One thing - Thermodynamics is about energy - not about biology.

There are better arguments against macro evolution.

The best argument/common sense is this: IF thing magically 'evolved' from less-complicated organisms through cellular mutation - and the mutations/adaptions that were most-beneficial remained...please explain how a cell could mutate into a blood cell - and if many mutated into blood cells, did they do it before or after other cells mutated into veins and arteries and hearts and shit.

One thing magically morphing into another thing is fairy-tale shit. Common sense and logic dictates a designer. Apart from that - those who disagree, do so out of ego or fear.

[Russ]

Man you guys are lame. When did this turn into a anti God thread? Gunny started the God crap. He was just ragging on scientific theory which has nothing to do with God. Please let's drop it.

The second law applies to a closed system. Are we living in a closed system? That is high school physics. You guys are like Jon Snow. You know nothing.


The Earth as a whole can be considered a closed system, dummy.

Here is Planck's statement of the entropy law: "Every process occurring in nature proceeds in the sense in which the sum of the entropies of all bodies taking part in the process is increased."


The whole evolution theory, that a simple organism can evolve into a complex one, reminds me of a similar theory that if you had a million monkeys and a million typewriters, eventually just by random chance they would write all the great books. Or a corollary theory: if you had a million Pete311's and a million typewriters, eventually he would write all the great books. Call me a skeptic, but I don't think it would happen in either case.

( Given enough time, the monkeys might come close, though. ;) )

[pete311]

The Earth as a whole can be considered a closed system, dummy.

Really? Nothing comes in, nothing goes out? Really?

In any case, using the earth as the system is not even appropriate since evolution doesn't factor in at that level. A more appropriate system to use where evolution is a factor is the human body. Now, ask yourself, is the human body a closed or open system. I'm getting hungry... and need to pee... hint hint.

[pete311]

reminds me of a similar theory that if you had a million monkeys and a million typewriters, eventually just by random chance they would write all the great books. Or a corollary theory: if you had a million Pete311's and a million typewriters, eventually he would write all the great books. Call me a skeptic, but I don't think it would happen in either case.

This is not a scientific theory. Do you know what a scientific theory is? I think you have many misconceptions.

[Kathianne]

This is not a scientific theory. Do you know what a scientific theory is? I think you have many misconceptions.
Good lord! Are you playing with a full deck?

[pete311]

Good lord! Are you playing with a full deck?

Exactly what is your problem? Russ mentions some "theories". I would love to read the paper on the million monkeys at a typewriter theory. Just give me the link to the study (scientific method). Sounds like rubbish to me and I bet he can't produce it, because it's not science.

I think what he is confusing is the infinite monkey theorem (different than a theory) which is a concept of infinity, where if a monkey is given infinite amount of time to type at a typewriter at some point he will write Shakespeare's Hamlet.

I still don't know how it has anything to do with the topic at hand.

[Drummond]

Regardless if it's preset design reality, scientists are still discovering it's process by the scientific method and theories. Do you think scientists get a tablet from a mountain every morning?

No. As I've said, they act to TRANSLATE their observations into coherent, logical reality. It's said that the Universe can be described mathematically. Therefore, what better proof of a designer of the Universe could you possibly have ?

[pete311]

No. As I've said, they act to TRANSLATE their observations into coherent, logical reality. It's said that the Universe can be described mathematically. Therefore, what better proof of a designer of the Universe could you possibly have ?

When did this turn into an intelligent design debate, because I never entered into one. Scientists use the scientific method to develop their theories. That is fact. I don't know what else this debate is about.

[Gunny]

Man you guys are lame. When did this turn into a anti God thread? Gunny started the God crap. He was just ragging on scientific theory which has nothing to do with God. Please let's drop it.

The second law applies to a closed system. Are we living in a closed system? That is high school physics. You guys are like Jon Snow. You know nothing.

Why accuse me of pointing out the elephant in the room? YOU started ragging on religion and used science as your springboard. I merely pointed it out. From a logical point of view, there is no difference and what I posted stands. Actual science is man's understanding of man. Scientific theory is just guess work. If you think otherwise, welcome to my religion.

If you think we know nothing because we disagree with you, you just answered your own dumbass question.

[pete311]

Scientific theory is just guess work.

This is patently false and shows your elementary misconception of what a scientific theory is. Everything in this world is built from scientific theory and it's completely absurd for you to deny that.

[Drummond]

Science is always refining itself, yes, that is the amazing part of science and why we have the technologies we have today. What is your point? Of course we are scratching the surface of understanding the universe, but you act like we know nothing. Look around you. The world is built from science.

It wasn't many centuries ago that Mankind thought the Earth was flat, and that we were at the centre of the Universe. I'm sure that scholars of that time would've felt themselves very justified indeed in saying the very thing you did, in the above quote. But by today's standards, would they have been right ?

Mankind can be very arrogantly delusional when it comes to a belief in a so-called 'understanding' of the Universe. It wasn't all that long ago that the total mass of the Universe, as we were able to measure it, fell far short of what it needed to be, to account for scientific understanding of its nature. So, 'Dark Matter' was thought of to 'plug the gap'.

By its very nature, nobody has ever observed Dark Matter. We believe it exists. We may be right. But if we're wrong ... it means that most of the Universe cannot be accounted for by the 'Great God' of science .. to this day.

Perhaps in the 25th century, people will look at our own arrogance and laugh, just as we laugh at the primitiveness and delusions of the 15th century. Maybe we don't understand what we think we do. Maybe ... we never fully will, yet will always BELIEVE that we do ?

[Gunny]

This is patently false and shows your elementary misconception of what a scientific theory is. Everything in this world is built from scientific theory and it's completely absurd for you to deny that.

Not even close to false. It's more scientific actually than your misguided beliefs. I understand exactly what a scientific theory is. Guesswork. Gee, I should write a Bible, huh? What is absurd is passing scientific theory off as anything more than another religion.

The Big Bang theory -- something from nothing which defies actual scientific law.

Expanding Universe -- how can something that is infinite expand? And how can you say it's expanding if you don't even know where the damn center is and can't define its borders?

Just brilliant. Apparently you are the one in need of going to logic and science classes. I understand both quite well.

[aboutime]

As much as I hate to admit it here. I actually feel sad, and sorry for people like pete.

What a terribly empty life he must be living as an AL GORE mind, planted upon hypothetical, unprovable theories found in books, and the sheltered minds of the perpetually stupid.

[pete311]

It wasn't many centuries ago that Mankind thought the Earth was flat, and that we were at the centre of the Universe. I'm sure that scholars of that time would've felt themselves very justified indeed in saying the very thing you did, in the above quote. But by today's standards, would they have been right ?

Mankind can be very arrogantly delusional when it comes to a belief in a so-called 'understanding' of the Universe. It wasn't all that long ago that the total mass of the Universe, as we were able to measure it, fell far short of what it needed to be, to account for scientific understanding of its nature. So, 'Dark Matter' was thought of to 'plug the gap'.

By its very nature, nobody has ever observed Dark Matter. We believe it exists. We may be right. But if we're wrong ... it means that most of the Universe cannot be accounted for by the 'Great God' of science .. to this day.

Perhaps in the 25th century, people will look at our own arrogance and laugh, just as we laugh at the primitiveness and delusions of the 15th century. Maybe we don't understand what we think we do. Maybe ... we never fully will, yet will always BELIEVE that we do ?

Nice, cherry pick cutting edge science which we are still very much developing.

If you don't believe in science, don't visit a hospital and throw your computer away, otherwise you trust science.

[pete311]

As much as I hate to admit it here. I actually feel sad, and sorry for people like pete.

What a terribly empty life he must be living as an AL GORE mind, planted upon hypothetical, unprovable theories found in books, and the sheltered minds of the perpetually stupid.

Navy communications... hmmm no science in that right?

[pete311]

Not even close to false. It's more scientific actually than your misguided beliefs. I understand exactly what a scientific theory is. Guesswork. Gee, I should write a Bible, huh? What is absurd is passing scientific theory off as anything more than another religion.

The Big Bang theory -- something from nothing which defies actual scientific law.

Expanding Universe -- how can something that is infinite expand? And how can you say it's expanding if you don't even know where the damn center is and can't define its borders?

Just brilliant. Apparently you are the one in need of going to logic and science classes. I understand both quite well.

ah and we're back to your original obsessed intent of creationism. You as well seem to dwell on a couple cutting edge sciences and ignore the thousands of scientific principles that are used every day. You throw all science out because of a few cutting edge sciences? Seriously, what the hell are you doing on a computer? Hello! That is operating and was built using thousands of scientific principles from theories. Must be all guesswork. Yeah like our theory of gravity. Maybe an apple will fall upwards tomorrow. Seriously, wtf man?

[jimnyc]

Let's go full circle here and back to the OP.

What say thou, Pete? Of all of the drastic predictions, predictions of world changing events - and there were many of those predictions - how many panned out?

[Gunny]

ah and we're back to your original obsessed intent of creationism. You as well seem to dwell on a couple cutting edge sciences and ignore the thousands of scientific principles that are used every day. You throw all science out because of a few cutting edge sciences? Seriously, what the hell are you doing on a computer? Hello! That is operating and was built using thousands of scientific principles from theories. Must be all guesswork. Yeah like our theory of gravity. Maybe an apple will fall upwards tomorrow. Seriously, wtf man?

Incorrect. I just see science for what it is. I see scientific theory for what it is as well. Please do note that I differentiate between actual science and scientific theory. The former is man's understanding of man's rules and the world we live in. The latter are fairy tales.

[pete311]

Let's go full circle here and back to the OP.

What say thou, Pete? Of all of the drastic predictions, predictions of world changing events - and there were many of those predictions - how many panned out?

Just about all of these predictions were made by singular scientists interviewed by a journalist. You can make a prediction cartoon for nearly any field of science. There is some bad science and bad scientists, no doubt, but they are the minority. Science is like a wave coming into shore. Some of the wave hits rocks and doesn't make it to shore. What is important is that the bulk of the wave does make it to shore. You don't focus on the parts that didn't make it. You also need to look at the predictions in context. It makes them a little less crazy. Like the no snow, was not about no snow anywhere, but the claim was no snow for great briton. Still wrong, but a little less crazy.

Today there was a story about how 90-100% of climate experts are now in consensus. A conspiracy involving thousands of scientists and institutions across the world is really beyond lunacy.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/apr/13/its-settled-90100-of-climate-experts-agree-on-human-caused-global-warming

[pete311]

Incorrect. I just see science for what it is. I see scientific theory for what it is as well. Please do note that I differentiate between actual science and scientific theory. The former is man's understanding of man's rules and the world we live in. The latter are fairy tales.

There is no difference between your actual science and theory. Everything we know and used is based off theory. That is not to say all theory is right, of course not. You are an electrician right? You tell me theory of electromagnetism is a fairy tale.

[aboutime]

Just about all of these predictions were made by singular scientists interviewed by a journalist. You can make a prediction cartoon for nearly any field of science. There is some bad science and bad scientists, no doubt, but they are the minority. Science is like a wave coming into shore. Some of the wave hits rocks and doesn't make it to shore. What is important is that the bulk of the wave does make it to shore. You don't focus on the parts that didn't make it. You also need to look at the predictions in context. It makes them a little less crazy. Like the no snow, was not about no snow anywhere, but the claim was no snow for great briton. Still wrong, but a little less crazy.

Today there was a story about how 90-100% of climate experts are now in consensus. A conspiracy involving thousands of scientists and institutions across the world is really beyond lunacy.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/apr/13/its-settled-90100-of-climate-experts-agree-on-human-caused-global-warming


YOUR LUNACY is in the eye of the BEHOLDER. Want some advice pete? Whether you do, or not. You should listen, and heed this. YOU are not the authority you want the rest of us to believe you THINK you are.
You do have the right to express your opinions, and say whatever you want. But..that does not give you the license, or any authority to always claim everyone else who doesn't agree with you is wrong.
That idea, on it's own...makes YOU wrong every time.

[jimnyc]

Just about all of these predictions were made by singular scientists interviewed by a journalist. You can make a prediction cartoon for nearly any field of science. There is some bad science and bad scientists, no doubt, but they are the minority. Science is like a wave coming into shore. Some of the wave hits rocks and doesn't make it to shore. What is important is that the bulk of the wave does make it to shore. You don't focus on the parts that didn't make it. You also need to look at the predictions in context. It makes them a little less crazy. Like the no snow, was not about no snow anywhere, but the claim was no snow for great briton. Still wrong, but a little less crazy.

Today there was a story about how 90-100% of climate experts are now in consensus. A conspiracy involving thousands of scientists and institutions across the world is really beyond lunacy.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/apr/13/its-settled-90100-of-climate-experts-agree-on-human-caused-global-warming

Predictions were made, predictions that were made that should have had results already. They didn't pan out.

I'll read what you just tossed out now. But I am skeptical of anything that starts out with "It's settled". And can you save me some time, since there are tons of embedded links in that piece I'm about to read. Can you just link me to the actual scientists and institutions that and such that are all in agreement? Yes, I'm lazy.

[pete311]

Predictions were made, predictions that were made that should have had results already. They didn't pan out.

I'll read what you just tossed out now. But I am skeptical of anything that starts out with "It's settled". And can you save me some time, since there are tons of embedded links in that piece I'm about to read. Can you just link me to the actual scientists and institutions that and such that are all in agreement? Yes, I'm lazy.

Flawed predictions that never should have been made in the first place, true, but again most were off the cuff statements, not born from an actual paper. Doesn't make the overall science wrong.

One thing you must understand is how journalism works. It uses marketing. Scientists didn't write that article. Writers who are under pressure to write catchy titles do. What is important are the details and original data sources. So I and I bet many good scientists aren't thrilled with the title either. That is not their fault.

The study was a survey of climate science papers from I think 2014. Out of 12,000 papers only some 3% either disagreed with AGW or had no opinion.

[Gunny]

Flawed predictions that never should have been made in the first place, true, but again most were off the cuff statements, not born from an actual paper. Doesn't make the overall science wrong.

One thing you must understand is how journalism works. It uses marketing. Scientists didn't write that article. Writers who are under pressure to write catchy titles do. What is important are the details and original data sources. So I and I bet many good scientists aren't thrilled with the title either. That is not their fault.

The study was a survey of climate science papers from I think 2014. Out of 12,000 papers only some 3% either disagreed with AGW or had no opinion.

I got 5 years of journalism under my belt. You are your own worst enemy. The "study" came to the conclusion it was told to. 12k papers of BS. Wonder how much THAT cost .....

[pete311]

YOU are not the authority you want the rest of us to believe you THINK you are.

You do have the right to express your opinions, and say whatever you want. But..that does not give you the license, or any authority to always claim everyone else who doesn't agree with you is wrong.
That idea, on it's own...makes YOU wrong every time.

I have never thought anything other than being a messenger.

When members on this board don't understand fundamentals of what science is, then it's time to cede your ego to the real authority, aka actually scientists. In this case, to the thousands of climate scientists. Not one of them who makes a silly prediction but to the consensus.

[pete311]

I got 5 years of journalism under my belt. You are your own worst enemy. The "study" came to the conclusion it was told to. 12k papers of BS. Wonder how much THAT cost .....

So you believe there is a global conspiracy involving thousands of scientists? I got a tin hat to sell you.

[NightTrain]

So you believe there is a global conspiracy involving thousands of scientists? I got a tin hat to sell you.


A recent study found that 99.9% of psychics firmly believe that everyone should call them daily for helpful pointers in successfully navigating their day.


Let me know when that filament between your ears begins to dimly glow.

[pete311]

A recent study found that 99.9% of psychics firmly believe that everyone should call them daily for helpful pointers in successfully navigating their day.

Let me know when that filament between your ears begins to dimly glow.

You believe in the global conspiracy, got it! I can't watch for the documentary, epic how thousands of scientists and institutions pulled this one off!


... you know there is more to climate science than global warming... right... right?

[Gunny]

So you believe there is a global conspiracy involving thousands of scientists? I got a tin hat to sell you.

In what form or fashion does your insult respond to anything I said? Scientists are overpaid idiots sucking off of tax dollars. I consider them globally stupid when they don't follow the laws of science and stat delving into disproving God with conjecture.

[pete311]

In what form or fashion does your insult respond to anything I said? Scientists are overpaid idiots sucking off of tax dollars. I consider them globally stupid when they don't follow the laws of science and stat delving into disproving God with conjecture.

What does climate science have to do with God? Scientists are the reason we can communicate right now. Show them some respect or go live in a cave.

[Gunny]

What does climate science have to do with God? Scientists are the reason we can communicate right now. Show them some respect or go live in a cave.

Really? God created life ro include our planet. You, a mere mortal think you can change it? I don't show respect to morons making up their own shit. Never have and today ain't changing a thing. I give no respect to people full of shit living off our tax dollars. I'd as soon fire them. Mike make a good dent in that $20T hole we're in not paying overeducated idiots to be overeducated idiots.

[Abbey Marie]

What does climate science have to do with God? Scientists are the reason we can communicate right now. Show them some respect or go live in a cave.



With politics and grant $$ on the line, whatever makes you think scientists are driven to find truth?

[pete311]

Really? God created life ro include our planet. You, a mere mortal think you can change it? I don't show respect to morons making up their own shit. Never have and today ain't changing a thing. I give no respect to people full of shit living off our tax dollars. I'd as soon fire them. Mike make a good dent in that $20T hole we're in not paying overeducated idiots to be overeducated idiots.

Seriously throw away your computer and live in a cave if you detest science so much. I'm tired of your hypocrisy.

[pete311]

With politics and grant $$ on the line, whatever makes you think scientists are driven to find truth?

$5 for a tin hat. Deal? I'm not saying there is no corruption, as there is with anything, but again, this level of conspiracy would be unparalleled. Thousands of climate scientists working together to bring down fossil fuel industry and to gain grant money. I can't wait for the wikileaks...

[Abbey Marie]

$5 for a tin hat. Deal? I'm not saying there is no corruption, as there is with anything, but again, this level of conspiracy would be unparalleled. Thousands of climate scientists working together to bring down fossil fuel industry and to gain grant money. I can't wait for the wikileaks...

Despite the sarcasm, it wouldn't be the first time science mislead us for political reasons. Why are you unable to question motives?

[Gunny]

Seriously throw away your computer and live in a cave if you detest science so much. I'm tired of your hypocrisy.

Seriously, I'm more logical, mathematical and scientific than you can dream of. You run on emotion. I don't have any. I don't detest science. I just don't give credence to its lies.

[pete311]

Despite the sarcasm, it wouldn't be the first time science mislead us for political reasons. Why are you unable to question motives?

As I said before, small scale corruption is one thing, but a conspiracy involving 10,000+ world scientists (including dozens of nobel laureates), dozens of respected world scientific institutions and dozens of first world countries would be unfathomable. You may disagree with the climate politics, I certainly often do actually, but don't mix that into the actual science.

[pete311]

Seriously, I'm more logical, mathematical and scientific than you can dream of. You run on emotion. I don't have any. I don't detest science. I just don't give credence to its lies.

Gunny, you flat out said scientific theory is guess work. All science comes from scientific theory. Now step off your high horse and throw away your computer based on guess work because it may blow at any second.

[Kathianne]

As I said before, small scale corruption is one thing, but a conspiracy involving 10,000+ world scientists (including dozens of nobel laureates), dozens of respected world scientific institutions and dozens of first world countries would be unfathomable. You may disagree with the climate politics, I certainly often do actually, but don't mix that into the actual science.

Are you familiar with 'herd effect?'

[pete311]

Are you familiar with 'herd effect?'

Only as it applies to immunity. Careful that is science, could be a conspiracy...

[Gunny]

Only as it applies to immunity. Careful that is science, could be a conspiracy...

When you come to a gunfight it helps if you bring bullets. :rolleyes:

[pete311]

When you come to a gunfight it helps if you bring bullets. :rolleyes:

I notice when some members have nothing to say, they speak in riddles

[NightTrain]

As I said before, small scale corruption is one thing, but a conspiracy involving 10,000+ world scientists (including dozens of nobel laureates),


Crap, you're right. I forgot that Al Gore and Oblabla were backing that.

It's settled.

[Kathianne]

I notice when some members have nothing to say, they speak in riddles

Methinks it's not riddles as much as an observation based on past experiences. Like the time you were speaking authoritatively on Constitution, when challenged on the details admitted you really didn't know much about such things.

No harm there, just don't act superior, as you haven't a clue to what everyone else here does know.

[pete311]

Methinks it's not riddles as much as an observation based on past experiences. Like the time you were speaking authoritatively on Constitution, when challenged on the details admitted you really didn't know much about such things.

No harm there, just don't act superior, as you haven't a clue to what everyone else here does know.

I don't have a clue what any of this has to do with my reply to you. Tell me about this herd effect. All I can find is "herd behavior (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_behavior)" and I don't see how it applies at all. Climate science is nothing like a riot, demonstration, strike or black friday.

[NightTrain]

I don't have a clue what any of this has to do with my reply to you. Tell me about this herd effect. All I can find is "herd behavior (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_behavior)" and I don't see how it applies at all. Climate science is nothing like a riot, demonstration, strike or black friday.


Beyond what Kathi just pointed out, didn't I spank you already about Global Warming a couple months ago? Using your own sources, no less?

[pete311]

Beyond what Kathi just pointed out, didn't I spank you already about Global Warming a couple months ago? Using your own sources, no less?

I'm sorry, do you have something to add to this thread?

[Kathianne]

I don't have a clue what any of this has to do with my reply to you. Tell me about this herd effect. All I can find is "herd behavior (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_behavior)" and I don't see how it applies at all. Climate science is nothing like a riot, demonstration, strike or black friday.

When some claim something is 'settled' as has the IPCC, and governments-two groups that have the power to control the flow of billions of $$$ to and fro themselves, a few things happen.

Those who dissent, well they don't get published, leading to reinforcement of said 'consensus.' Those that aren't published in academia find themselves without tenure or able to obtain funding.

It's almost like a 'conspiracy,' except those in control would certainly disagree.

There are literally tens of thousands of scientists that acknowledge that there is climate change, but question what degree, if any humans contribute or can do to change the effects. Meanwhile, the 'authorities' that proclaim 'consensus' tax or fine' and subsidize those they often are in bed with.

[pete311]

When some claim something is 'settled' as has the IPCC, and governments-two groups that have the power to control the flow of billions of $$$ to and fro themselves, a few things happen.

Source where IPCC claimed "It's settled"?


Those who dissent, well they don't get published, leading to reinforcement of said 'consensus.' Those that aren't published in academia find themselves without tenure or able to obtain funding.

Source?


There are literally tens of thousands of scientists that acknowledge that there is climate change, but question what degree, if any humans contribute or can do to change the effects. Meanwhile, the 'authorities' that proclaim 'consensus' tax or fine' and subsidize those they often are in bed with.

Don't mix your dislike for the politics with the science.

[Kathianne]

Source where IPCC claimed "It's settled"?



Source?



Don't mix your dislike for the politics with the science.

I'm not going on a rabbit hunt for you. Sorry, I don't do that for posters I know and like. I'm not mixing politics and science, the governing bodies and scientists that benefit are the ones doing that.

[pete311]

My question to all here is what would it take to convince you?

[pete311]

I'm not going on a rabbit hunt for you. Sorry, I don't do that for posters I know and like. I'm not mixing politics and science, the governing bodies and scientists that benefit are the ones doing that.

When you make important and bold claims, you should back them up otherwise it's just your opinion.

Politics mixes in everything. So why do you trust anything? How can you drive in a car when the science behind it and the companies who build and sell them are involved in politics. How can you trust that car?

[Kathianne]

When you make important and bold claims, you should back them up otherwise it's just your opinion.

Politics mixes in everything. So why do you trust anything? How can you drive in a car when the science behind it and the companies who build and sell them are involved in politics. How can you trust that car?

Do you see the irony here?

[pete311]

Do you see the irony here?

Why can't you just say what you want to say and end with the riddles and games. It's such a waste of time.

Are you saying you want me to provide a source for my claim that politics mixes in everything?

[Kathianne]

Why can't you just say what you want to say and end with the riddles and games. It's such a waste of time.

Are you saying you want me to provide a source for my claim that politics mixes in everything?

You're correct, waste of time. You might wish to read your own posts though.

[Gunny]

I notice when some members have nothing to say, they speak in riddles

I'll put it to you like this, Pete. I can have a disagreement or an argument. You have insulted me, and my friends for no fucking reason. You can't make a point you're so busy trying to sound cool and dog us out. So I'll return in kind. I don't do riddles, dickhead. Agree with me or not, like me or not I put the shit right on the line.

You want a war you can't win? Keep it up. I'm a total prick and based on your lack of intelligence whipping your ass won't take that long.

Try being nice. It works. Otherwise, your lame ass is starting to get on my nerves.

[NightTrain]

I'm sorry, do you have something to add to this thread?

Oh, sorry. I didn't realize you were calling the shots around here. My bad.


You already lost the Global Warming debate, and badly. Why are you now pointing to the fools that propagate that as if it's relevant? You don't have a leg to stand on.

Further, why do you insist on having people point out the obvious? Are you buying time or something?

Pro-Tip : This isn't a real-time medium - you can respond after you research something instead of blurting something out to gain a few seconds of thought.

[jimnyc]

I notice when some members have nothing to say, they speak in riddles

Roses are red,
violets are blue,
you suck!

[pete311]

I just want to end my participation in this thread by pointing out how worthless the last 4 posts are. What a waste of time.

Once again this is one big circle jerk. I get called out and yet you all ignore your buddies insults to me.

[NightTrain]

I just want to end my participation in this thread by pointing out how worthless the last 4 posts are. What a waste of time.

Once again this is one big circle jerk. I get called out and yet you all ignore your buddies insults to me.

Come here, little fella. I'll give you a hug.

[jimnyc]

I just want to end my participation in this thread by pointing out how worthless the last 4 posts are. What a waste of time.

Once again this is one big circle jerk. I get called out and yet you all ignore your buddies insults to me.

Damn, petey, I was even kind enough to spend my quality time in writing you a nice poem!!

Bad day, Pete? I was just fucking with ya!

I suck and am an asshole, I admit it!! :laugh:

[Gunny]

I just want to end my participation in this thread by pointing out how worthless the last 4 posts are. What a waste of time.

Once again this is one big circle jerk. I get called out and yet you all ignore your buddies insults to me.

Oh, did someone disagree with your worthlessness? You sound like Trump (shut up, Jim). Wah -fucking-wah.

And just to be clear -- again -- who am I ignoring? You think I read everything everyone has to say on this board? You're dreaming if you do. I actually avoid some threads just so I don't get involved in someone's pissing contest.

Grow up. There isn't one person on this board that hasn't been in my ass and there's no one I haven't been in theirs. We give as good as we get and we don't sit around acting like little bitches about it. Then along comes Mr Whiner. You aren't new nor novel. There's always one or two. You think the world begins and ends with you. You have to make things personal.

I tried to have a logical discussion with you and you think resorting to insults wins an argument? It tells me you lost the second you start.

[Russ]

I don't have a clue

That pretty much says it all.

[Gunny]

That pretty much says it all.

Well f*ck. I WAS trying to be almost sort of nice in my own way. :laugh2:

[Russ]

$5 for a tin hat. Deal? I'm not saying there is no corruption, as there is with anything, but again, this level of conspiracy would be unparalleled. Thousands of climate scientists working together to bring down fossil fuel industry and to gain grant money. I can't wait for the wikileaks...

You should charge more than $5 for your tin hats, Pete, because clearly the ones you have work very well. :laugh:

[Abbey Marie]

I just want to end my participation in this thread by pointing out how worthless the last 4 posts are. What a waste of time.

Once again this is one big circle jerk. I get called out and yet you all ignore your buddies insults to me.

It's all good, Pete. We just like messing with people. :salute:

[pete311]

There isn't one person on this board that hasn't been in my ass

Oh my god this quote is precious! Did you really just say this? I need this as my signature. :D

Jim, is this true? Have you been in Gunny's ass? :D

[pete311]

There, I think I set it!

[Abbey Marie]

Oh my god this quote is precious! Did you really just say this? I need this as my signature. :D

Jim, is this true? Have you been in Gunny's ass? :D


Hey now, aren't you the gay rights defender? :laugh2:

[Gunny]

Oh my god this quote is precious! Did you really just say this? I need this as my signature. :D

Jim, is this true? Have you been in Gunny's ass? :D

Go find a Trump thread, butthead, We disagree with each other and get over it without melting down or insulting the Hell out of each other. We call each other names only in jest. We don't use it as our argument.

You can use what you want as your signature. Another poster's tagline is "Gunny's nightmare". Hell, I might start thinking I'm popular or some sh*t. :laugh:

[aboutime]

Oh my god this quote is precious! Did you really just say this? I need this as my signature. :D

Jim, is this true? Have you been in Gunny's ass? :D


pete. Sounds like it's only precious for you since you are jealous, and WISH gunny had the opportunity, and you'd probably RETURN THE FAVOR if he did.:laugh:

[Drummond]

What does climate science have to do with God? Scientists are the reason we can communicate right now. Show them some respect or go live in a cave.

Idiot. Communication methods are made possible through the physical laws this Universe operates by. Without them, scientists could do nothing at all (.. indeed, the scientists themselves wouldn't even exist in the first place ..).

This Universe operates from its physical attributes (dimensions, passage of time, etc etc). WHO or WHAT CREATED THOSE ATTRIBUTES ?

I'll let you into a little secret, Pete. Scientists did NOT. Which is why you should cease to think of science as your 'god'.