What Do We Think About Climate Change

[wardd]

Originally Posted by RHP

US physics professor: 'Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life'


http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ja...-my-long-life/

maybe i missed it but which oil company or any other entity is funding agw research to prove agw?

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by wardd

maybe i missed it but which oil company or any other entity is funding agw research to prove agw?

You can't prove a lie. That is why AGW is unproven.

[wardd]

Originally Posted by hoytedow

You can't prove a lie. That is why AGW is unproven.

how long did you think about that answer?

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by wardd

how long did you think about that answer?

Why??

[wardd]

agw is not a lie, it's science almost as solid as evolution

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by wardd

agw is not a lie, it's science almost as solid as evolution

You have mentioned two theories. Show me the proof.

[wardd]

don't you know what a theory in science is?

as in the theory of flight,

after all homo sapiens are still evolving, why we just had an evolutionary change just 5000 or so years ago, or are you watching to see if monkeys evolve into people before your eyes?

[hoytedow]

Honk! Quack!
Get your birds to translate.

[wardd]

they don't understand me neither, unless i say grape, the gooses seems to know that word

[hoytedow]

In that case, grape.

[Boston]

another long sad insistence on ignorance, unfortunately not unique to this thread but to other sites where various paid oil and gas shills congregate. Science opperates on preponderance of data and by consensus view, you get no proof, at best you get a working theory able to make predictions. occasionally you get a concept sound enough to be considered a law but proof, clearly some folks simply do not understand the scientific process

cheers
B

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by Boston

another long sad insistence on ignorance, unfortunately not unique to this thread but to other sites where various paid oil and gas shills congregate. Science opperates on preponderance of data and by consensus view, you get no proof, at best you get a working theory able to make predictions. occasionally you get a concept sound enough to be considered a law but proof, clearly some folks simply do not understand the scientific process

cheers
B

This dash needs Rogain because it is balder.

[alanrockwood]

Originally Posted by RHP

US physics professor: 'Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life'


http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ja...-my-long-life/

I am not sure where Professor Lewis is getting the idea that there are "trillions of dollars driving" "the global warming scam". I think he simply made up the number because "trillions of dollars" are simply not available for scientific research. The two largest funding agencies in the US are NIH and DOE. They spend annually about $30 billion each on research. The other principle funding agency is NSF, with about $7 billion. Smaller amounts come from other agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture. These are total budgets for all research. I can guarantee you that global warming research is only a fraction of these numbers, and very likely a small fraction fraction at that... at most a few billion. Even if you throw in research funding from the other countries there is no way that global warming research is measured in trillions of dollar.

[alanrockwood]

Originally Posted by alanrockwood

I am not sure where Professor Lewis is getting the idea that there are "trillions of dollars driving" "the global warming scam". I think he simply made up the number because "trillions of dollars" are simply not available for scientific research. The two largest funding agencies in the US are NIH and DOE. They spend annually about $30 billion each on research. The other principle funding agency is NSF, with about $7 billion. Smaller amounts come from other agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture. These are total budgets for all research. I can guarantee you that global warming research is only a fraction of these numbers, and very likely a small fraction fraction at that... at most a few billion. Even if you throw in research funding from the other countries there is no way that global warming research is measured in trillions of dollar.

By the way, annual alcohol sales in the US run about $112 billion, a much higher amount than the US government spends on research each year, which in my view pretty much proves that Americans would rather be drunk than smart.

[wardd]

Originally Posted by alanrockwood

By the way, annual alcohol sales in the US run about $112 billion, a much higher amount than the US government spends on research each year, which in my view pretty much proves that Americans would rather be drunk than smart.

we could all be drunk republicans