- Posts: 4316
- Thank you received: 30
Shhhhh! There's A Communist Living In The W.H.
26 Sep 2011 11:44 #142
by ScienceChic
And I've checked into the funding question - the contrarians is far more suspect than the climatologists. But even that doesn't matter to me - I care about the weight of the evidence, and it's far and away for AGW. I'm guessing you haven't read my links?
And the data on the neutrinos is very preliminary - I'd wait before pronouncing a "pillar" being tumbled. And even if it is found to be true, it's just more data that is incorporated into the current theories that explain the observations and will cause them to be revised - that's what the process of science is all about. New data is not to be feared, or ignored, but tested until proven accepted, then incorporated into current accumulated data and explanations of said data. Nothing has come up yet that overturns the over 100 years of accumulated data on AGW - only the uncertainties in what will play out in the coming decades, centuries, and millenia.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Replied by ScienceChic on topic Shhhhh! There's A Communist Living In The W.H.
No, I haven't yet - my hours are limited and I haven't even had time to read any of my favorite books lately. Real world measurements are what I posted Heartless, not modeling. But anyone who tries to state that real-world measurements increases of CO2 are more volcanic in nature, ignore the Keeling curve in correlation to volcanic eruptions overt that time period, and not accept a 114 year old paper that hasn't even ever been disputed by some of the most ardent climate contrarians (nor is the Keeling curve, for that matter), is frankly a waste of my time - they have no grasp of even the fundamentals of the physics of CO2 or how the measurements have been taken to make an educated, informed decision as to what's credible.HEARTLESS wrote: So this is a categorical NO as to having watched the videos, listened to who gets the research funding (those using modeling, not real world measurements) seeing the 110 year payback for the solar system on the Denver Museum of Natural History then.
And I've checked into the funding question - the contrarians is far more suspect than the climatologists. But even that doesn't matter to me - I care about the weight of the evidence, and it's far and away for AGW. I'm guessing you haven't read my links?
And the data on the neutrinos is very preliminary - I'd wait before pronouncing a "pillar" being tumbled. And even if it is found to be true, it's just more data that is incorporated into the current theories that explain the observations and will cause them to be revised - that's what the process of science is all about. New data is not to be feared, or ignored, but tested until proven accepted, then incorporated into current accumulated data and explanations of said data. Nothing has come up yet that overturns the over 100 years of accumulated data on AGW - only the uncertainties in what will play out in the coming decades, centuries, and millenia.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.167 seconds
sponsors
