I think you're thinking of a gynatologist.
Snow because of global warming!
- Thread starter bugscoe
- Start date
I think you're thinking of a gynatologist.
Actually, global warming skeptics are advancing extraordinary claims about the nature of energy absorption of the CO2 molecule itself.
They don't seem to realize it, but their extraordinary claims are going to require extraordinary evidence. For one, show that the planet is actually cooling without picking el-nino years.
Science DOES work this way. Science is about testing hypotheses and either confrming or rejecting them. Science is logic. Even a five year old child can use sheer logic to test hypotheses.
I remember having talked to a deeply religius person once. This person believed that the earth was created by God 6 thousand years ago. And indeed according to Bible that's when the earth was created (more or less). I tested the hypothesis of the earth having being created 6k years ago using a logic that is available to a 5 year old child:
If earth was created 6k years ago then the dinosaur fossils must be younger or equal to 6k years. It turned out that the dinosaur fossils can be as old as 170 / 180 / 190 million years. Ergo, the earth is older than 6k years and the deeply religious person's beliefs were wrong from a science's point of view.
The hypothesis that the earth was created 6k years ago failed the test. The reply this person gave me is that the godless scientists put fake fossils in the ground to mislead God believers. How one can debunk such an argument
This person is a religious fanatic with little regard for science (even on a 5 year old child's level).
_____________________________________________________________
In the video that I posted professor Carter put the AGW to test. The AGW hypothesis FAILED from a science's point view. What was your response? Bad operating of Powerpoint. How one can debunk such argement
You also stated that something in his graph was wrong, yet you refuse to show with screenshots what was allegedly wrong. How debating this issue with you is possible
You are a AGW fanatic with little regard for science, even on a 5 year old child level...
Yeah, I guess it's really stretching the credibility of science that the earth experiences climatic variance as opposed to "it's different this time, really" or "we were wrong last time but I promise we have it right this time".
The paul erlich syndrome.
http://www.junkscience.com/news/fumento.html
Carter is a political hack. His opening to the presentation is purely political.
When he actually gets onto talking about the evidence, the first thing he does it set up a straw man. He looks at temperature data cherry picked from 1998 to 2005 and says "Look here - no warming trend and CO2 has gone up and temperature didn't which disproves the AGW hypothesis." Problem is that this hypothesis exists only in his head. Real climate science has never asserted that temperature will go up every year or every few years, but that rather that the trend is up over longer periods. Setting up straw men and knocking them down has nothing to do with science, and this form of demagogic dishonesty has nothing to do with science.
Carter is the sort of clown that would stand on a beach, looking at the waves go in and out and declare - "See, there is no such thing as tides!"
Quote from Tresor:
In the video that I posted professor Carter put the AGW to test. The AGW hypothesis FAILED from a science's point view. What was your response? Bad operating of Powerpoint. How one can debunk such argement
You also stated that something in his graph was wrong, yet you refuse to show with screenshots what was allegedly wrong. How debating this issue with you is possible
You are a AGW fanatic with little regard for science, even on a 5 year old child level...
No, nothing failed in AGW from "science's point of view" (I would put "sic" here, but it's fairly obvious that this is ridiculous.)
I stated that both his graphs are wrong, but I can't know for certain without you presenting some facts or data, something which you haven't done.
Therefore the only argument you've advanced was "appeal to authority" -- a guy who can't use Powerpoint. His arguments have so many holes (including incomplete data) that I wouldn't even know where to begin.
Advance an argument and I'll shred it for you. You haven't done that yet.
Everybody agrees that the climate varies.
But that's not the argument.
Quote from Tresor:
It even failed from a five year child's logic POV.
Wrong, but not for certain
Hahaha
You seem upset. I can't disprove his graphs because you haven't sourced them (and watching a tiny youtube video, at an angle, as he struggles with the magic of Powerpoint, doesn't help.)
If you'd like to discuss some graphs I can give you some. Or you can present some data. You really haven't done anything at all here.