Religious Beliefs

[shipper hannah]

because science disproves god.

Logically, you cannot prove a negative.

[Col.Foley]

Are you a scientist?

Good question...you have gotten me...I am not a scientist. .....I am a mere idiot who has absolutly no knowlege of what I am talking about...it is not like I have a brain or anything, it is not like I can look at the so called evidence and see that it has flaws in it...no of course not! Only a scientist can do these things....
And that....is another debate for another time.

[shipper hannah]

Good question...you have gotten me...I am not a scientist. .....I am a mere idiot who has absolutly no knowlege of what I am talking about...it is not like I have a brain or anything, it is not like I can look at the so called evidence and see that it has flaws in it...no of course not! Only a scientist can do these things....
And that....is another debate for another time.

I don't see how you're qualified to judge what is good science and bad science. Why is it you can see all this 'bad science' and the multitudes of scientists can't?
Ever heard of peer review? The scientific method?

[Col.Foley]

I don't see how you're qualified to judge what is good science and bad science. Why is it you can see all this 'bad science' and the multitudes of scientists can't?
Ever heard of peer review? The scientific method?

I have, and I have. And the multitudes of scientists can see this. There are many many scientists, some of them quite prominent here who has lept to the same conclusion I have. That there is something fishy about this whole notion of global warming, particularily the man made and man contributed aspects.
I am not saying I do not believe that there could be such a thing as global warming, in fact I do think of this as a possibillity. I am merely saying that scientsts have to come up with a lot better information, and conclusions from that information, and frankly some common sense before I believe that it is fully.
In other words, the theory might be right, but how they are going about trying to prove it and force it on us is......I guess there is no two ways about it....wrong.

[shipper hannah]

I have, and I have. And the multitudes of scientists can see this. There are many many scientists, some of them quite prominent here who has lept to the same conclusion I have. That there is something fishy about this whole notion of global warming, particularily the man made and man contributed aspects.
I am not saying I do not believe that there could be such a thing as global warming, in fact I do think of this as a possibillity. I am merely saying that scientsts have to come up with a lot better information, and conclusions from that information, and frankly some common sense before I believe that it is fully.
In other words, the theory might be right, but how they are going about trying to prove it and force it on us is......I guess there is no two ways about it....wrong.

I can just type 'global warming' into Google Scholar and have it bring up tons of recent peer-reviewed scientific papers.
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?...8&start=0&sa=N
Maybe these scientists should have sent their papers to you for review rather than other scientists?

[Col.Foley]

I can just type 'global warming' into Google Scholar and have it bring up tons of recent peer-reviewed scientific papers.
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?...8&start=0&sa=N
Maybe these scientists should have sent their papers to you for review rather than other scientists?

Maybe they should have.
Let me ask you a question. Do you know of the political bias that exists in the global warming debate?

[shipper hannah]

Maybe they should have.
Let me ask you a question. Do you know of the political bias that exists in the global warming debate?

I don't listen to the politicians, I listen to the scientists.

[shipper hannah]

I gotta go to bed now it's very late.. or rather very early.. for me now. I'll catch up tomorrow.

[tombombadil]

I believe in a thing called love

[tombombadil]

Right....
I have seen most of the date before, well a good deal of it. And guess what? It is bad science. All of it. Bad bad, bad, bad, terrible science. It is so obvious, to me, that I am surprised more people are not questioning this.

.....says a high school student judging the work of experts in their field.....

[Col.Foley]

.....says a high school student judging the work of experts in their field.....

Actually when you get down to it...says other 'experts' in the same, or different, fields.

[~Dave]

I have, and I have. And the multitudes of scientists can see this. There are many many scientists, some of them quite prominent here who has lept to the same conclusion I have. That there is something fishy about this whole notion of global warming, particularily the man made and man contributed aspects.
I am not saying I do not believe that there could be such a thing as global warming, in fact I do think of this as a possibillity. I am merely saying that scientsts have to come up with a lot better information, and conclusions from that information, and frankly some common sense before I believe that it is fully.
In other words, the theory might be right, but how they are going about trying to prove it and force it on us is......I guess there is no two ways about it....wrong.

We have the good fortune of living during an inter-glacial age. The Earth is still warming from the last ice age, and may one day begin to cool again into another one. Maybe not. I have no idea if this is good or bad for life forms. And I do not know if man has anything to do with it or not. On the other hand, I have no objection to those who do, cleaning up the environment. That has to benefit everyone regardless of any effect on climate change.

~Dave

[Col.Foley]

We have the good fortune of living during an inter-glacial age. The Earth is still warming from the last ice age, and may one day begin to cool again into another one. Maybe not. I have no idea if this is good or bad for life forms. And I do not know if man has anything to do with it or not. On the other hand, I have no objection to those who do, cleaning up the environment. That has to benefit everyone regardless of any effect on climate change.

~Dave

Thank you! This is exactly how I feel on the subject as well, as far as cleaning up the planet is concerned.

[Morbo]

guys. just stop.
i'm right.
we'll leave it at that.

[Pandora's_Box]

Right....
I have seen most of the date before, well a good deal of it. And guess what? It is bad science. All of it. Bad bad, bad, bad, terrible science. It is so obvious, to me, that I am surprised more people are not questioning this.

I am actually curious as to what you qualify as bad science because, let me tell you, as someone who spends a great deal of her life reading scientific journals and papers, and analysing all sorts of data, I have seen all sorts of science including the stuff that doesn't warrant the name.

But a lot of the evidence that supports global warming is not bad science; it is facts and figures, measurable increases in global temperatures that have been tracked over hundred of years, measurable changes in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and in the oceans. Not only are the numbers real and irrefutable and plain as day for anyone to see, but so are the noted changes in the global climate, the melting of the polar ice caps and subsequent rise of sea levels.

So I don't know how well versed you are in this topic, but you could stand to read some more if, as you claim, so much of what you've read is "bad science". There is a lot of good science out there that supports global warming.

Take a look at The Environmental Protection Ageny's website for a decent catalog of facts, figures, and charts. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.