Why Does the Global Warming Faith Claim to be Science?

Because far and away the scientic consensus is that it is real.
There is no such thing as a consensus in science, only in religion and politics. Scientifically illiterate morons believe there is a consensus in science because they don't even know the difference between science and religion.

You are one of those scientifically illiterate morons.


most rational people believe them before they do a right wing ignorant shithead such as yourself.
Leftists are working overtime to corner the market on scientific illiteracy, mathematical incompetence, logical ineptitude, economics malpractice and "thtupid" in general.

You must be one of the front line foot soldiers.
 
There is no such thing as a consensus in science, only in religion and politics. Scientifically illiterate morons believe there is a consensus in science because they don't even know the difference between science and religion.

You are one of those scientifically illiterate morons.



Leftists are working overtime to corner the market on scientific illiteracy, mathematical incompetence, logical ineptitude, economics malpractice and "thtupid" in general.

You must be one of the front line foot soldiers.

^^Thanks for showing that right wingers are dumb motherfuckers.
 
Your king is tipped. Let me know if you'd like to play again.

I realize the discomfort of having your religious beliefs totally doused with cold water, especially after you were assured by people you trusted to do your thinking for you that your faith was thettled thienth. The good news is that the rough part is over. It only stings for a couple of days and then FREEDOM. You won't be bent over furniture and fucked up the ass until you beg for more.

Allow me to be the first to congratulate you.

I saw no indication that you understand the second law of thermodynamics and you don't understand AGW and you don't seem to really understand earth systems.
 
I saw no indication that you understand the second law of thermodynamics
I have reread this thread several times and no one is accusing you of being able to understand anything I write.

and you don't understand AGW
I never claimed to hold that faith or to be a member of that congregation.

I stick to physics and math. I'll leave the religious dogma to you.

Don't worry, by the way, none of your congregation have been able to provide any science support for your faith either.
 
What do yo mean by the rest of the planet's average temperature? Are you talking about the core and mantle as well?????

You don't seem to know what the Second Law is about. Let's be clear. The second law states that in a CLOSED system the entropy will increase. That's it'. How does the warming of the surface of the earth violate the second law? And exactly how much of the earth's surface temperature do you think is due to heat from the planet's cooling itself?

WRONG. The 2nd law of thermodynamics states:

e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy will always either stay the same OR increase in any given (closed) system. Earth is such a system. Sun-Earth-space is a different system. The known universe is a different system. They are ALL closed systems. You cannot consider any heat source or sink from outside the system. You cannot compare two systems as if they were the same system.

Earth cannot warm by itself. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.
 
Last edited:
WRONG. The 2nd law of thermodynamics states:

e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy will always either stay the same OR increase in any given (closed) system. Earth is such a system. Sun-Earth-space is a different system. The known universe is a different system. They are ALL closed systems.

Oh jeeeezus, Sybil. Stop trying to play scientist.
 
Human caused climate change is quite clearly real.
If it's quite real, you should be able to define it. Define 'climate change'.
The scientists who demonstrate that are far more credible than the conspiracy theorists who deny it.
Please describe this 'demonstration'. Be prepared why it isn't just some parlor trick.
The real question to discuss is whether or not it's too late to do anything about it.

If it's already too late, we shouldn't deprive ourselves of the lifestyle we prefer.
Too late for what? You haven't made an argument yet!
 
Oh jeeeezus, Terry. Stop trying to emerge from your persistent vegetative state. It will only result in disappointment. Just let the brain stem do everything from now on.

You post like you. might be 35-ish, living at home with your parents. Possibly bipolar schizophrenic. Another "Sybil" I see.
 
Already addressed that. Religion is a worship of a deity and a belief system in the supernatural. Christianity fits that definition.
What about religions that have no deity, such as Shinto or indian tribal religions?

The Church of Global Warming has several deities:

Gaia, goddess of the Earth,
the government,
Al Gore, the Holy Son of global warming, sacrificed by hanging chad, but returns from the dead from time to time to say something stupid,
the Holy Gas, carbon dioxide, given magickal properties to somehow be able to warm the Earth.

Yet you seem to think that 'climate change' is somehow more than a myth even though you can't seem to define it. Why?
 
Last edited:
You seem to insist that it's not a myth. YOU need to give evidence that is more than a myth. YOU need to give evidence that it is more than just a religion.
Great point. If his argument is that Global Warming is more than a myth and is actually settled science, then he should provide that very science and put the issue to rest.
 
False. You do not get to change the definitions and expect people to just accept then.
So then you don't consider Shinto or Buddhism or any of the indian tribal belief systems religions? You voted you the World Definer or Words???
False. There is no worship and no deities in climate science.
I have already listed them.
It is not a belilef.
It is a belief.
Sin is a religious concept.
And sin in the Church of Global Warming is no exception.
You have already lost in the very first post. You just haven't realized it yet.
How has he 'lost'?? Assumption of victory fallacy.
 
Back
Top