Sally Vix wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
1) "scientific consensus" is a real thing. Look it up. But granted, nothing in science is beyond question.
2) Here you are saying that you are smarter than the scientists who did the research to come up with the 97% number.
3) Here you are saying that you are smarter than the climate scientists and that you believe in a global scientific conspiracy (data manipulation).
4) Again, you are saying that you are smarter than the climate scientists.
5) China is currently doing more than than the US to convert to renewable energy. They are the undisputed leader in the manufacture and deployment of solar energy. China is by far the largest market for electric vehicles. They are winning the future because they will have unlimited energy that is virtually free while we still rely on expensive fossil fuels.
1) You do not understand science if you say there can be a "consensus" in science.
2) If you do not understand why that 97% number is bogus, then I will not explain it to you. YOu need to learn it on your own.
3) There was widespread data manipulation. Are you disputing that? Was climate data not doctored to get the results that those who did the doctoring wanted?
4) I am not saying I am smarter than climate scientists. I am saying their track record is equivalent of falling south of the Mendoza line (.200) in baseball. They have a terrible track record. Why should we rely on them when they have proved themselves so awful in their predictions?
5) Go look at a chart of China's CO2 emissions over the last 2 decades. America's CO2 emissions have been declining and China's are set to quadruple in barely over two decades.
1) I do understand science quite well. I've spent most of my life working in science and engineering. And I also got my degree from one of those top science and engineering schools. I know this stuff. "scientific consensus" is a real thing. Without it, there would be no undergraduate science classes.
2) If you know more than the authors of the IPCC study then please enlighten us. Otherwise, I'll trust the experts.
3) There is no evidence of a global scientific conspiracy. You need to remove your tin foil hat.
4) Yes, you are indeed saying you are smarter than the climate scientists. If these scientists had no confidence in their conclusions, they would say so based on scientific analysis. That's what Dr. Curry has done. But the fact that you have no confidence in climate science is not based on scientific analysis. It is only based on your feelings.