Extreme climate events

[Teenwolf]

Please see above for documented "BS" by "scientists". Your "scientists" have been predicting a variety of cataclysmic disasters for 30 years now, all of which have not come true. Much like the fake prophets who claim "We know the end day! Jesus is coming on <this day>", your "scientists" have been as accurate as they have been.

Trump and chancellor... proving the danger of egomania daily!

[Teenwolf]

Are there no right wingers here who want to speak up on behalf is science/against right wing science denialism?

It just gets tiring seeing 5 on 1 or whatever. Even when debating verifiably egregiously stupid things posted. He's making y'all look bad. I'm hoping its only chancellor and 1J hanging out in the rubber room.

[Gregg]

Are there no right wingers here who want to speak up on behalf is science/against right wing science denialism?

It just gets tiring seeing 5 on 1 or whatever. Even when debating verifiably egregiously stupid things posted. He's making y'all look bad. I'm hoping its only chancellor and 1J hanging out in the rubber room.

You sound a lot like Trump. Page out of his playbook?

[Teenwolf]

You sound a lot like Trump. Page out of his playbook?

Gregg, what do you think of right wingers denying science?

I am pissed off legitimately reading such egotistical tripe to think one person knows better than scientific consensus.

[Gregg]

Gregg, what do you think of right wingers denying science?

I am pissed off legitimately reading such egotistical tripe to think one person knows better than scientific consensus.

If they are ethnic, agnostic, or quiet about it, it is ok. If they are white, Christian, or vocal not so much.

Your question sucks. It is like have you stopped beating your wife yet?

There is no denying that science is one of the most important tools for mankind. Sometimes really great tools are used for bad purposes or to further agendas. There is nothing wrong with questioning the science or the agendas.

As a society we have lost faith in our policeman, politicians, religions, scientists (not science), big business, doctors, lawyers, teachers. We can no longer take anything at face value.

As far as my own belief system, I am of the mind that all good things are from God. Science is a good thing. It is not infallible, nor is it god.

[Teenwolf]

If they are ethnic, agnostic, or quiet about it, it is ok. If they are white, Christian, or vocal not so much.

Your question sucks. It is like have you stopped beating your wife yet?

There is no denying that science is one of the most important tools for mankind. Sometimes really great tools are used for bad purposes or to further agendas. There is nothing wrong with questioning the science or the agendas.

As a society we have lost faith in our policeman, politicians, religions, scientists (not science), big business, doctors, lawyers, teachers. We can no longer take anything at face value.

As far as my own belief system, I am of the mind that all good things are from God. Science is a good thing. It is not infallible, nor is it god.

No! WE... havent lost faith in science. Right wingers like chancellor are spreading bullshit, and it further bakes in the bullshit when folks like you defend it by saying "well, you each have an opinion, each as valid as the next." That's the fucking problem. Scientific consensus isn't an opinion! It's a massive collective understanding based on constant refinement of the facts as they're known.

Gregg, when did you stop beating your wife?!

Edit - not sure why you differentiate science/scientists... saying that the scientific community allows fraud on an institutional basis is saying that scientists are complicit in that fraud.

[Teenwolf]

The economic incentive to deny cigarette smoke harm was clear. The economic incentives to deny climate science are just as clear. By saying "sometimes science has an agenda" you muddy the waters of a vividly clear scenario, where the only ones possibly compromised are those commissioned by industry incentivized to hide damage.

[Gregg]

No! WE... havent lost faith in science. Right wingers like chancellor are spreading bullshit, and it further bakes in the bullshit when folks like you defend it by saying "well, you each have an opinion, each as valid as the next." That's the fucking problem. Scientific consensus isn't an opinion! It's a massive collective understanding based on constant refinement of the facts as they're known.

Gregg, when did you stop beating your wife?!

Edit - not sure why you differentiate science/scientists... saying that the scientific community allows fraud on an institutional basis is saying that scientists are complicit in that fraud.

Science unto itself is not corrupted. Scientists can be, grant money, big business etc. This is NOT to say that we should not embrace science. I am saying that in today's climate questions are the norm.

Do you consider medicine to be a large part of the scientific community?

On my wedding day as we were walking down the isle as man and wife, my wife leaned over and whispered in my ear "Remember if you ever cheat on me I will cut of your dick when you are sleeping." She hates abuse more than cheating.

[chancellor]

Science unto itself is not corrupted.

Here’s where we part ways. As much as it pains me to admit, science IS corrupted. Primarily because the scientists have allowed themselves to be corrupted. While the popular blame is to money - see DMT’s note about the Koch’s, for example- right now peer pressure is far stronger than money. It’s the only excuse for the fiasco of an article Nature recently published.

[TranaGreg]

so if science is unreliable / corrupt what should decision makers base their decisions on? intuition? scripture? good ol' common sense?

[Fresno Bob]

Hardly. This "science" is far more religion and faith than fact. It's why repeated climate change claims (i.e, "Snowfalls are a thing of the past" or that the Himalayas would be snow free) have been repeated debunked. Many of the "peer reviewed" studies have used falsified data or corrupted the results (as did the most recent study published by Nature, which was almost instantly debunked).

Just remember, we had four years left...four years ago. Link: https://www.theguardian.com/environm...m-hansen-obama

Or, we had a decade left....in 2006: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14834318/n.../#.W-51ROhKjIU

By the way, you'll note a common thread there: "Scientist" James/Jim Hansen

Oh, and we had ten years left in 1989, too: https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

debunking junk science is the very heart of the scientific method! "Scientists" once though that you could determine intelligence by the lumps on ones head until they didn't, no matter how much someone believed. Much of what we now know about plate tectonics, dinosaurs, and particle physics was thought to be "junk science" until guess what, it was proven correct by the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Greenhouse gases heat up the planet, the vast majority of greenhouse gases are man-made, either directly from burning of fossil fuels, or indirectly from land clearing/burning of rainforest for agriculture. As the population has increased, the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased and the average global temp has increased. All of this is proven

[OaklandA's]

right now peer pressure is far stronger than money. It’s the only excuse for the fiasco of an article Nature recently published.

How is this an example that supports your case? The authors made a mistake, it was pointed out, and they corrected the error. This all happened within two weeks. That's how science works - someone publishes something, other scientists study it and challenge the science if they see errors.

You seem to be implying that because there was an error in this one paper in Nature, the hundreds or thousands of other papers can't be trusted, even though no one has pointed out any errors in them.

[onejayhawk]

You sound a lot like Trump. Page out of his playbook?

He does, now that you mention it.

so if science is unreliable / corrupt what should decision makers base their decisions on? intuition? scripture? good ol' common sense?

Science is as capable of having cults as any other human organization.

J

[Fresno Bob]

my industrial air filter just arrived

[TranaGreg]

Science is as capable of having cults as any other human organization

Okay, keep on electing people who base their decisions on faith and gut feel, as opposed to evidence and science; we'll see how that works out for y'all.