Search results

The comparison is reasonable. Both AGW and Gravity are obviously supported by scientific evidence even though you might believe one of them isn't. Predicting to what extent AGW will damage the planet is not settled, just as it is not settled exactly how much gravity is certain to damage a...

Is it to to with solar effect or not! If it is, the science, you know that stuff in the Royal Society, it does not support what he claims. Oh come on piezoe, Salby's beliefs are not enough. He has not produced any paper for peer review on his beliefs, while scientific evidence directly...

What the hell difference is me posting one to you going to make!? Go find one yourself for fks sake.You've just been given one source and the place is full of 'em. If I post one on gravity in a flat earth forum, what do you think the response would be? Exactly! Same as yours. What you won't...

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America is full of them. They also cover Evolution and Physics too but not moon landings. In your world that must mean there is no single peer reviewed scientific paper demonstrating moon landings cause men to land on...

It does not conform. You are wrong. Proceedings of the Royal Society A. Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences. DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2007.0347 Lockwood / Fröhlich "[..] all solar forcings of climate have declined since 1987. " "The temperature record is simply not consistent with any of...

For goodness sake. Didn't I say it's very unlikely you'll ever understand what a ridiculous response you've made? I was right! and you've doubled down. :D Of course there is peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming , just as there is peer reviewed science showing gravity...

Then you (Shaviv & Salby) need better science, your opinion isn't enough. I have been careful not to confuse what Shaviv or Salby have been saying. I think the shoe is on the other's foot as far as that is concerned. Or rather in your gushing praise of them, you confuse what science is...

It is very unlikely you'll ever understand what a ridiculous response that is , or how much you managed to pull off such a gigantic WTF??!!o_O moment by totally making and missing my point both at the same time. Let me try that "you might not be seeing it in peer reviewed papers because...

Well that's not really the crucial issue is it.. The crucial issue is will humanity continue to play a game of Russian Roulette with the planet and its climate, when there is no other competing scientifically sound explanation for recent strong levels in global temperature increase other than...

They don't of course . One reason why they don't publish is this...of course A study has confirmed that there are no grounds to blame the Sun for recent global warming. The analysis shows that global warming since 1985 has been caused neither by an increase in solar radiation nor by a decrease...

I typed this search.. gravity causing falling no links to peer reviewed science The peer reviewed science must be out there though. Afterall, there is scientific consensus on both.

Dude, for goodness sake! The links I made direct further inquiry towards the hard science out there. It reveals your reluctance to follow through and is another reason why providing links is a waste of time . Shaviv and Salby need to make presentation to places like the Royal Society, not...

No point in posting a link. Everyone who takes any rational interest in the subject knows the internet is full of links to published peer reviewed papers explaining how anthropic CO2 is causing warming. Same for evolution and gravity and moon landings. You are someone still in denial of the...

Actually there probably isn't a single peer-reviewed paper which claims that spacetime curvature causes gravity which is dangerous to mankind either. Perhaps they're just the kind of things that are screamingly f'kng apparent if one's being sensible about what's dangerous to mankind from the...

ass over tits. Not how science works What there aren't, are any peer reviewed scientific papers, published or not, to counter the very large amount of published peer reviewed scientific papers, which explain how anthropic CO2 is causing warming. Funny thing. There are also those who say there...

hey, climate denial IS religious:p Me neither piezoe. Hell I don't even care if Keating doesn't support Trump! I don't care either if the Shaviv guy is an Israeli-American physics professor , carrying out research in the fields of astrophysics while failing rather miserably to make a...

Here's some food for thought :) Nir Shaviv Debunked apparently it's an old chestnut

It ain't necessarily so. The things that you're liable, to read in the Bible, It ain't necessarily so.

Were he atheist, he'd only have himself to blame.:finger:

Include folks who don't go to church and you'd double the amount of those decent responsible people.:p