Why Should Anyone Believe in Global Warming?

Flash said:
One distinguishing element is that science is observable, verifiable, and can be duplicated while religion cannot be observed or proven.
Click to expand...
Thank you. You just explained why Marxist religions like Global Warming, Climate Change, Church of the Facemask, etc. are all based on that which cannot be observed or verified.

* If I ask you to show me Global Warming so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me the global climate so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me this sea level rise that you are certain is threatening all beach-front property, so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me ocean acidification so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me face masks protecting against viruses so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me either fossils or dead things rotting into petroleum and natural gas, so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me greenhouse gas increasing earth's temperature simply by redistributing the existing quantity of thermal energy, so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.
* If I ask you to show me one original thought offered by either Cypress or AProudLefty, so that I can observe it and verify it for myself, you can neither show it to me nor rationally justify your belief in it.

It is simply a set of beliefs which cannot be verified.
 
Exxon disputed climate findings for years. Its scientists knew better.

Projections created internally by ExxonMobil starting in the late 1970s on the impact of fossil fuels on climate change were very accurate, even surpassing those of some academic and governmental scientists, according to an analysis published Thursday in Science by a team of Harvard-led researchers. Despite those forecasts, team leaders say, the multinational energy giant continued to sow doubt about the gathering crisis.

In “Assessing ExxonMobil’s Global Warming Projections,” researchers from Harvard and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research show for the first time the accuracy of previously unreported forecasts created by company scientists from 1977 through 2003. The Harvard team discovered that Exxon researchers created a series of remarkably reliable models and analyses projecting global warming from carbon dioxide emissions over the coming decades. Specifically, Exxon projected that fossil fuel emissions would lead to 0.20 degrees Celsius of global warming per decade, with a margin of error of 0.04 degrees — a trend that has been proven largely accurate.

“We thought this was a unique opportunity to understand what Exxon knew about this issue and what level of scientific understanding they had at the time,” added co-author Naomi Oreskes, Henry Charles Lea Professor of the History of Science whose work looks at the causes and effects of climate change denial. “We found that not only were their forecasts extremely skillful, but they were also often more skillful than forecasts made by independent academic and government scientists at the exact same time.”

Allegations that oil company executives sought to mislead the public about the industry’s role in climate change have drawn increasing scrutiny in recent years, including lawsuits by several states and cities and a recent high profile U.S. House committee investigation.

Harvard’s scientists used established Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) statistical techniques to test the performance of Exxon’s models. They found that, depending on the metric used, 63-83 percent of the global warming projections reported by Exxon scientists were consistent with actual temperatures over time. Moreover, the corporation’s own projections had an average “skill score” of 72 percent, plus or minus 6 percent, with the highest scoring 99 percent. A skill score relates to how well a forecast compares to what happens in real life. For comparison, NASA scientist James Hansen’s global warming predictions presented to the U.S. Congress in 1988 had scores from 38 to 66 percent.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/st...research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/
 
Into the Night said:
While it IS possible to boil water at room temperature (and even lower!), I assume you mean also under normal atmospheric pressure (14.7APSI) and temperature (71 deg F).

That is colloquially put, but yes. He is trying to do the same thing as make hot coffee with ice cubes. He is trying to heat a warmer object (the surface) with a colder one (a Magick Holy Gas).

He somehow thinks you can do this by using Holy Links or by insulting people.
Click to expand...
Yes sir... I wouldn't want to confuse him any more than he already is... :D
 
Saint Guinefort said:
LOL. Nothing I've said is that stupid. I honestly wish you and your socks would take a science class. Just one. At your local community college or something. Just get some expertise in the field.
Click to expand...
Yup, you really do think that insults can somehow make science go away and make your wacky religion "true".
 
Saint Guinefort said:
LOL.

Socky sock sock socks for socks.
Click to expand...
WHOA! The wisdom that continues to exude from your brilliantly beautiful mind is "rocket scientist" genius!!! You are a master teacher, an expert in the art of the 'LOL' and in the obsession with socks. Nobody can accuse YOU of having cold feet! :D
 
ZenMode said:
You clearly have your own science.
Click to expand...
What is "his science"?

ZenMode said:
I suspect it's the same people
Click to expand...
Science is people?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

TOO FUNNY!!!!

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

ZenMode said:
who were going to the feed store for Ivermectin to treat their covid.
Click to expand...
Ivermectin is ivermectin.

There would be no need for anyone to "go to the feed store" if it weren't taboo for our nation's doctors to prescribe it or if it were available over the counter as it is in numerous other countries.

ZenMode said:
Either way, there's no rationalizing with crazy. Enjoy your time in Crazyville, Mr. Jones.
Click to expand...
Yup, that's why I've long since tried to rationalize with you. You are here to preach, not to learn.
 
gfm7175 said:
Into the Night said:
While it IS possible to boil water at room temperature (and even lower!), I assume you mean also under normal atmospheric pressure (14.7APSI) and temperature (71 deg F).

That is colloquially put, but yes. He is trying to do the same thing as make hot coffee with ice cubes. He is trying to heat a warmer object (the surface) with a colder one (a Magick Holy Gas).

He somehow thinks you can do this by using Holy Links or by insulting people.
Click to expand...
Yes sir... I wouldn't want to confuse him any more than he already is... :D
Click to expand...
Anyone besides me notice how polite Sybil treats his socks? LOL

Mantra 50 Public Masturbation

Into the Night said:
Mantra 1a.
Click to expand...
gfm7175 said:
Mantra 4a.
Click to expand...
IBDaMann said:
One of the "miscellaneous" documents on that site is Into the Night's mantra list.
Click to expand...
 
Into the Night said:
gfm7175 said:
Yes sir... I wouldn't want to confuse him any more than he already is... :D
Click to expand...
That's rather tough, you know! He's pretty confused! :D
Click to expand...
4d9j9j.gif

Mantra 50 Public Masturbation

Into the Night said:
Mantra 1a.
Click to expand...
gfm7175 said:
Mantra 4a.
Click to expand...
IBDaMann said:
One of the "miscellaneous" documents on that site is Into the Night's mantra list.
Click to expand...
 
gfm7175 said:
What is "his science"?


Science is people?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

TOO FUNNY!!!!

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:


Ivermectin is ivermectin.

There would be no need for anyone to "go to the feed store" if it weren't taboo for our nation's doctors to prescribe it or if it were available over the counter as it is in numerous other countries.


Yup, that's why I've long since tried to rationalize with you. You are here to preach, not to learn.
Click to expand...

Ivermectin (which has shown a surprising effectiveness against a covid19 infection) is already approved for human use (under prescription). It is already used to treat intestinal parasites, and is used topically to treat stubborn cases of lice or for skin conditions such as rosacea. Some doctors have been prescribing it for treating covid19 infection.

It is also used in veterinary medicine for treating intestinal parasites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top