Manmade Global Warming, A hoax? A Scam? or a Doomsday Cult? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Manmade Global Warming, A hoax? A Scam? or a Doomsday Cult?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Don Hurst who wrote (3758)	2/11/2014 5:19:36 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By Id_Jit Read Replies (1) of 4326

Does she explain how warming of the Arctic... increases the total amount of ice in the Arctic ? Even though defending the fraudulent theory will require her to predict that all the ice has to melt... because its warmer ? Hmmm. It's just quibbling about the structure of variation that is occurring... that still avoids the issue. The "problems" in the advocates logic are really simple ones... First is the "Chicken Little" theory of the scientific method... showing that "the method of science" is designed not to ask valid questions and seek truthful answers, but to assert the truth of errors in order to elicit a planned response that will enable desired policy... Then, advocates are playing a game of bait and switch, that has them claiming that any evidence of any CHANGE... is a proof of their claims about what CREATES change... which is required to enable their implementation of POLICY. Theirs is a program to advance lies... to enable the policy they want... and it really is NOT about science, but policy. Lies to enable policy. And, its not the only place you see the same people doing the same thing: nationaljournal.com The first assumption you see in all their climate work... is the assumption that a static condition is normal, and any change from that static condition they select... is abnormal, and needs to be stopped. Obviously wrong. Including obviously wrong in seeking to foster any authorization that enables them in exerting control... Change is normal. Variation is normal. Change... is NATURAL. We don't know what the range of normal is... and we don't know what causes variation within the range of normal... we don't know what's causing change now... and we don't know what caused change in the past. If they're not explicitly stating their assumptions about change... and defining a well understood basis for the NORMAL range of variation in climate history... the entire effort begins in fraud... Then, the fact of a thing existing... is NOT a proof of its CAUSALITY... The same stupidity can be used to prove anything... if obviously fraudulent assumptions aren't questioned. "Humans exist on the planet (and, since I assume they couldn't exist if they weren't placed here by an alien civilization) therefore, aliens exist." The assumptions matter. "Change exists (and, since I assume it shouldn't) therefore it is caused by... (choose anything else that is also obviously changing, and claim it is the cause)". Proof of causality requires MORE from reason than only predictions that are validated by observation... but, the scientific method does require any theory makes predictions that ARE validated by observation ? Without that validation... there is no proof... making the claim there is proof... a lie. And, as long as the liars run things... we're stuck with the same medieval mentality as Galileo faced.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next