Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Global Warming, er Climate Change is a National Security Threat


.

 

Quote:One has basis in science the other does not. It's the attempting to call it a religion as an insult which is humorous (and very telling of how they view there own structures).
 

One CLAIMS to have a basis in science. A scientific theory requires predictions that can be falsified. When you falsify the predictions of a religion, they just vaguely adjust the religion so that it includes the observations. This is exactly what CliSci is doing.


 

No warming? No problem. It needs to be for at least 10, er 15, er 17, er 25 years before our theory is wrong. Or it's hidden in the deep ocean (miraculously bypassing the top layers) and ignoring that if the deep ocean can absorb the warming there's no problem. Or it's because of Chinese aerosols. Or we'll just make another adjustment to the data and voila! "see it's still warming." How is this any different than getting all of your followers to give you their worldly possession and wait in a field for the rapture, and when there's no rapture claiming a slight miscalculation, "but it'll happen next year?"


 

How is this science? Because those who expound this call themselves scientists and give each other PhDs?


 

And while several of the skeptics here are religious, I have yet to see an argument against Global Warming based on religion. I'd expect religious people to disagree with other religions. That's hardly hypocritical, or however you see it as being humorous.


 

 

Quote:Every one of those arguments applies to science deniers of all topics. 
 

Wrong! None of those arguments apply to skeptics of catastrophic global warming. Where have skeptics demanded that everyone make sacrifices? Where have skeptics limited the argument to a chosen few?
 Skeptics have always asked for the chance to debate. The believers refuse because they haven't won these debates in the past. Skeptics accept raw data, they don't adjust it to fit their beliefs.




                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Global Warming, er Climate Change is a National Security Threat - by MalabarJag - 09-04-2015, 05:08 PM



Users browsing this thread:
9 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!