The climate debate used to be like the gravity debate. There wasn’t one because no one denied it.
The climate debate used to be like the gravity debate. There wasn’t one because no one denied it.
Conundrum wrote:
Racket wrote:
Wrong. Scientific consensus is not a tool that a scientist uses, and the progress of science does not depend on it unless you want to argue about direction of research and funding and trendy topics to study throughout the ages. Scientists rely on reproducibility, hypothesis testing, and all the other stuff I mentioned. No one is creating new "science" from consensus, which again, is really on a word for all you non-scientists to talk about the goings on of actual scientists.
But wait! There's more! First of all, wow I got bored way faster than I thought I would when I started typing this. Second, the overall quality of peer reviewed papers and all that has absolutely plummeted so to be honest there probably is a lot of people agreeing with outcomes just because and honestly I'm way less interested in continuing on about this than I thought now
Scientists do work from the consensus of other scientist who have examined the validity and reproducing of previous studies and findings. The don't reexamine every scientific finding from the past. They work from the consensus of scientists who have done this.
They do trust consensus. (Of course they can challenge it if they have evidrnce)
To go back to Racket's "2 + 2" example, you must have consensus on the properties of addition before you can prove the properties of multiplication. Math and science are very similar in this regard.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
Incorrect! Trump is a serial liar. That ALONE should be enough for someone not support him, but then we have the criminality and nastiness and racism and sexism and ignorance and incompetence and laziness and mass spending for golf and all his broken promises (I'm glad that he hasn't been able to keep his promises, but a supporter of his shouldn't be), and on and on. You can NOT trust a person who lies like Trump does. It is beyond stupid to support someone who lies like that, and NO, there is no political equivalent, and NO all politicians do not lie like that.
While ALL racist people are also stupid, I make a separate point for them because for SOME, it is the racism that drives their support of Trump.
There are only two reasons why ANYONE would support Trump today:
1) JUST stupid.
2) Racist.
There are NO other possibilities. Not a single one.
Oh YES there is. Vote for Trump to watch you squirm.
INCORRECT!
1) I NEVER squirm.
2) Voting for Trump to try to make anyone squirm or even to make liberals mad, is stupid. He's a danger to the world and our democracy. Takes a stupid person to vote for that.
I correctly repeat:
There are only two reasons why ANYONE would support Trump today:
1) JUST stupid.
2) Racist.
There are NO other possibilities. Not a single one.
Fat hurts wrote:
To go back to Racket's "2 + 2" example, you must have consensus on the properties of addition before you can prove the properties of multiplication. Math and science are very similar in this regard.
Yikes
Unintended consequence of stonewalling is that only the most dedicated witnesses testify.
jesseriley wrote:
Unintended consequence of stonewalling is that only the most dedicated witnesses testify.
You mean, the most dedicated to the Deep State?
Those "career bureaucrats" must have been threatened by the People's President.
Forgotten Man wrote:
jesseriley wrote:
Unintended consequence of stonewalling is that only the most dedicated witnesses testify.
You mean, the most dedicated to the Deep State?
Those "career bureaucrats" must have been threatened by the People's President.
Does "career bureaucrats" and "liars" mean the same thing?
“my country....my laws”. When it’s really our country, our laws.
I seriously wonder about people like this, where does that sense of misplaced entitlement come from?
Hope he get the full 35 years, at 61 he won’t see the light of day again.
Forgotten Man wrote:
Overthrows wrote:
Not a single Trumper has responded to the Kentucky GOP's plan to steal the election for governor.
What's wrong with contesting the election results? Al Gore did the same thing in Florida. He refused to accept the fact that Bush won. Did you criticize him back then?
Retard, Gore requested a recount. The GOP only wanted a recount in GOP strongholds which favored them. A recount should have been random. The SCOTUS refused to allow a recount of any kind, although it was Gore's right to ask for one.
Now in Kentucky the above is not the GOP's plan. They want the decision for governor to be made by the GOP majority Kentucky Senate simply because the result is close and being contested. And how do you think the GOP will vote?
Forgotten Man wrote:
jesseriley wrote:
Unintended consequence of stonewalling is that only the most dedicated witnesses testify.
You mean, the most dedicated to the Deep State?
Those "career bureaucrats" must have been threatened by the People's President.
The People's President is Hillary.
The Electoral College's President is Trump.
Conundrum wrote:
What I think wrote:
Rojo is Sally based on past posts of Rojo.
Possibly, but I am feeling pretty confident that the "dems-lose-again" troll is Sally.
Rojo is posting here, so he could Sally too.
Look, idiot, everyone on this thread has always known that "dems-lose-again" is jamin. Well, everybody but you, apparently.
Try not to be so clueless. It is embarrassing to witness.
Urine Idiot 2 wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
Possibly, but I am feeling pretty confident that the "dems-lose-again" troll is Sally.
Rojo is posting here, so he could Sally too.
Look, idiot, everyone on this thread has always known that "dems-lose-again" is jamin. Well, everybody but you, apparently.
Try not to be so clueless. It is embarrassing to witness.
My vote is on Sally Vix actually being Hardloper because they both have the same pseudo-intellectual style but my real dark horse pick is wejo. It's definitely not rojo because rojo isn't smart enough to keep the ruse up for this long. He would have slipped and posted under his own name by now or something.
Anyone remember DFF? So many great emojis
Conundrum wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
I never said that science equals consensus and I never said that consensus doesn't change.
I am merely pointing out that consensus is necessary in science. Without it, you have nothing to build upon.
I agree with you that, "Consensus is reached by replication and reproducible results, scholarly debate, and peer review."
In the case of climate change, consensus has been reached by replication and reproducible results, scholarly debate, and peer review taking place at least since 1896.
For climate change, the scientific consensus is that current global warming is caused primarily by man-made emission of greenhouse gasses. If we do not drastically cut emissions in the next ten years then we are sentencing our children and grandchildren to conditions that will be increasingly unlivable. There is even a statistically significant chance that mankind could be extinct by the end of this century.
The final answer:
You are both right about consensus and science, and your argument comes down to semantics.
Whether a scientific fact is correct or not, is irrelevant to consensus. If scientific consensus said the earth was flat, it doesn't make it flat.
However,the field and progress of science is very much dependent on consensus and the findings of earlier scientists. Scientists rely on the consensus of scientists and their learned findings to decide what is known and what research needs to be done. They don't go back and examine every experiment that's ever been done to determine what is true, they rely on scientific CONSENSUS.
A science book would never have been written without consensus of understanding of the science reviewed.
So although you are both right, in the context of the consensus of scientists believing in global warming, fathurts reflects the reality here. Unless you are a climatologist and personally examined every bit of information pertaining to climate change, you would be a fool to ignore the findings of the consensus of scientists.
Reading this thread it is often difficult to imagine anyone being more of a pompous ass than Flagpole. But then, along comes Conundrum with his insufferable airs of being the final judge of any debate going on here.
Get over yourself, douchebag.
Stock market record highs
Tariffs are being rolled back in stages
Trump wins
Trump wins again!
The LR lib echo chamber wants to put a socialist in the WH-this will crash the market and make us all poorer.
#Trumplandslide
KAG2020
The tariff crisis is totally self-made and easily fixable.
But this is still a potential agreement to a roll back of the tariffs they put on each other.
It's not a deal and it may not happen.
Trump really shot himself in the foot on this one.
But if things simply go back to where they were he would call it the greatest deal ever. And his followers would believe it.
Racket wrote:
Anyone remember DFF? So many great emojis
DFF is jamin. He often posted under that name when drunk.
X-Runner wrote:
The tariff crisis is totally self-made and easily fixable.
But this is still a potential agreement to a roll back of the tariffs they put on each other.
It's not a deal and it may not happen.
Trump really shot himself in the foot on this one.
But if things simply go back to where they were he would call it the greatest deal ever. And his followers would believe it.
Spot on. A self-inflicted disaster by Trump which has cost taxpayers BILLIONS with higher costs, and bailing out farmers. Farm bankruptcies are up 24% because of Trump.
X-Runner wrote:
The tariff crisis is totally self-made and easily fixable.
But this is still a potential agreement to a roll back of the tariffs they put on each other.
It's not a deal and it may not happen.
Trump really shot himself in the foot on this one.
But if things simply go back to where they were he would call it the greatest deal ever. And his followers would believe it.
Just like the economy. Trump and Republicans criticized Obama endlessly for not breaking 3% real GDP. Now that Trump is POTUS, he claims the economy is so much better because of him. However, he hasn't broken 3% real GDP either.