Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Oh, yeah...scientists know mmgw is bogus. It's freakin SCIENCE


calfoxwc

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

From http://www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html

 

"The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence."

 

"In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples."

 

I don't think it is implausible to think that someone out there is trying to abuse the MMGW issue for financial gain but that has zero relevance to whether or not MMGW is real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually in this situation follow the money is one of my three favorite retorts all on speed dial.

:)

Also included are what are you planning to sacrifice to save the world? And oh my god!! We are doomed.

 

But of course I think that man does have an effect upon the climate however we don't know how much or how much other forces are involved or what we can logically do about it. But as to follow the money, I think it's pretty clear that most countries in the UN would profit by weakening the United States of America. By increasing our tax base, sending a great deal of it to other countries and making United States production more expensive, well you get the idea.

 

So my take is not that the scientist who work for people who will profit from that are making it up, but exaggerating it to find a way into the pockets of the US.

 

I'm not positive of the exact numbers but I would venture a guess as to that most of these scientists are paid by governments rather than oil companies.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll give you a hypothetical example. Say I am the mayor of tiny town. We had two murder this year and one last year.

As mayor I would like to have a big increase in taxes purportedly to pay for more police.

My campaign is this: Citizens of tiny town, we have seen our murder rate double in the span of only a year! I urge you to vote YES on the five mil property tax levy in order to pay for more security for our town.

To the naysayers I ask , can we afford to stand by and do nothing?

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, I don't care really, on how scientists want to define theory and fact...

 

just stop trying to take gov. control over everything in the name of it.

 

Here's a fact - anybody who is all upset over alleged MMGW, and is concerned

about CO2....

 

and doesn't give a crap about the destruction of the world's virgin rain forests, I mean,

we're talking millions and millions of acres...

 

is either a fool, or wants mmgw UN style to distribute wealth to poor countries.

 

Take yer pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, I don't care really, on how scientists want to define theory and fact...

 

just stop trying to take gov. control over everything in the name of it.

 

Here's a fact - anybody who is all upset over alleged MMGW, and is concerned

about CO2....

 

and doesn't give a crap about the destruction of the world's virgin rain forests, I mean,

we're talking millions and millions of acres...

 

is either a fool, or wants mmgw UN style to distribute wealth to poor countries.

 

Take yer pick.

 

You would be hard-pressed to find a scientist who wasn't concerned about both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you don't care what science facts or theories are haha. If you did, it would interfere with some of your preconceived notions.

 

Also, not everyone who agrees with mmgw existing believes that your wallet should be raided. I work in the natural gas industry with tons of people who believe in mmgw. We don't want to be unemployed but we certainly don't lie to ourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, I don't care really, on how scientists want to define theory and fact...

 

just stop trying to take gov. control over everything in the name of it.

 

Here's a fact - anybody who is all upset over alleged MMGW, and is concerned

about CO2....

 

and doesn't give a crap about the destruction of the world's virgin rain forests, I mean,

we're talking millions and millions of acres...

 

is either a fool, or wants mmgw UN style to distribute wealth to poor countries.

 

Take yer pick.

 

 

That's the point. Like Logic said, if you actually did care what they said your views on a lot of things could/would change.

 

 

You bring up this rainforest thing a lot. All the time really. Where do you get that people that recognize climate change is happening don't care about the rainforest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is clamoring to raise taxes? The same ghost who is arguing with Cal about the rain forest?

No Log.

We have done this dance for years with a couple of very intelligent posters who have recently left the board. One of them, heck, who Woody almost always sucked up to, probably posted on the great benefits of a carbon tax (cap and trade) at least a couple times a week. The carbon tax is a big favorite amongst the international community mostly because the United States has the most money to spread around.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I agreed with him on a lot of things therefore I sucked up to him.... forgot about that.

more than that in my opinion, woody, I think you agreed without actually knowing what the issue was.

A referendum on the possible success of a carbon tax is quite different then yes mankind causes a change or no mankind causes no change.

that one seems pretty simple and harder to debate. Solutions, well they are another matter.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with MMGW denialism is that it impedes any discussion of solutions to the problem. How can a problem be solved if people aren't willing to acknowledge it.

 

 

 

 

 

But that's because you guys just can't resist biting on it.I think it's kind of ridiculous to say there's no such thing, or that man has absolutely zero to do with it. But why waste your time arguing against that?My guess is that's easier to debate than to try to tell me how much time we have left or to what extent man causes a problem. Or how it can be reversed. Or anything that matters.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh

By the way I completely disagree with your blog entry about not wanting us fat boys to be a protected group.

I'm ready; hand me some free shit for being fat!

Maybe I could get a gig, similar to Al Sharpton, on MSNBC as the token Fatman and bitch about reparations for the weight challenged.

 

The Thin Man be keeping us down long enough.

 

:D

 

Wss

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate all of those "fat pride" groups. It is a awful they act like it is normal and healthy to be that big. Then we're stuck paying the bill for something entirely their lazy ass' fault. Riding around on the rascal scooters meant for old people... ugh.

 

I read your blog entry too, nice read. What position were you on the line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Scientific community has often made invalid conclusions while having a limited understanding and incomplete evidence regarding certain subjects. Remember when eggs were bad for you? All forms of fat were once bad for you too. Margarine was thought to be healthier for you than butter (lol). Evidence now suggests that eggs are one of the best foods you can eat and even saturated fat does not cause heart disease. The bottom line is that there is not enough conclusive evidence to prove mmgw.

 

Regarding mmgw, it is nearly impossible to definitively prove since it's impossible to conduct a proper experiment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't a theory if you can collect data and see a direct correlation that is repeatable by 97% of a group. More than 3% of the population can't change a flat tire. That doesn't mean that changing a flat is just a theory.

Yes, it is. It's a theory. The only way to definitively prove that mmgw is a valid theory without question would be to have another earth somewhere for scientists to study where the only variable was the amount of co2 in the atmosphere. Earth in real life have thousands of variables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...