|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 06/03/2007 : 10:36:33 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Cune, "major cause" and "beyond expectations" are two very different degrees.
I think you need to decide what you believe the scientific consensus states.
|
This sort of semantic nit-picking smacks of desperation on your part, JdG. No sensible person-- unless that person were trying to cling to the last shreds of an otherwise utterly untenable argument-- would read the the statements of Kil and me and think that we're arguing for different things.
|
Jerome, just so you don't try to use this again, Cune's and my statements say exactly the same thing. We are not saying anything different from each other. Cune and I concur. We are on the same page. We are in complete agreement.
I still haven't figured out what the main malfunction is in your thinking, but to me it looks like you just want to argue and will say anything at all, no matter how absurd, to get a response.
Whatever floats your boat…  |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 11:26:47 [Permalink]
|
Ricky said " The only thing not natural is humans."
Really, humans are not natural?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 11:31:37 [Permalink]
|
Kil---Your statement of what the consensus believes is more easily defendable; I commend you on your use of language.
Are you now revising your statement that the consensus believes that man is the major cause of global warming?
If so, would you show were in the ipcc report it is stated that man is the major cause of global warming?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 11:50:09 [Permalink]
|
Cune, so far it looks like we can not see the poll. As such we can not make a determination of these statements validity.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
Gallup poll of 400 members of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society[citation needed]
* Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting states that the report said that 66 % of the scientists said that human-induced global warming was occurring, with 10 % disagreeing and the rest undecided. In a correction Gallup stated: "Most scientists involved in research in this area believe that human-induced global warming is occurring now."
* George Will reported "53 percent do not believe warming has occurred, and another 30 percent are uncertain." (Washington Post, September 3, 1992)
I, as well will continue to search for the poll so as to discern which interpretation is correct. I will not stand my interpretation on others that have "axes to grind".
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 11:53:55 [Permalink]
|
| [troll] |
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 11:58:11 [Permalink]
|
Furshur, are all of your 1307 posts insults, or am I missing the good ones?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 11:59:45 [Permalink]
|
Filthy, you quoted this:
The study, published by the US National Academy of Sciences, shows that carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing by about 3 per cent a year during this decade, compared with 1.1 per cent a year in the 1990s
Total emissions?
Man made emissions?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 14:14:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Kil---Your statement of what the consensus believes is more easily defendable; I commend you on your use of language.
Are you now revising your statement that the consensus believes that man is the major cause of global warming?
|
Me:
There is a world wide consensus if climatologists who agree that the earth's atmosphere is warming and that human's are contributing to that warming well beyond what they would expect if the warming were solely due to a natural cycle. |
What here alludes you? I do not have to revise a thing... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 15:21:38 [Permalink]
|
O.k.-
So everyone agrees that the consensus refers to: global heating caused by man as the majority factor, with no speculation on serious implications?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 18:09:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
So everyone agrees that the consensus refers to: global heating caused by man as the majority factor, with no speculation on serious implications? |
Nope. Nobody should agree that that's what the consensus is, because it's not. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 19:03:07 [Permalink]
|
Dave, then what does the consensus state?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 20:02:37 [Permalink]
|
Why was that an insult? You are obviously trolling.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2007 : 22:32:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave, then what does the consensus state? |
I've already explained it. If you can't be bothered to read it, I'm not going to waste time explaining it again. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2007 : 23:24:14 [Permalink]
|
Dave, how does James Randi define the scientific consensus?
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 06/07/2007 : 01:53:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Filthy, you quoted this:
The study, published by the US National Academy of Sciences, shows that carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing by about 3 per cent a year during this decade, compared with 1.1 per cent a year in the 1990s
Total emissions?
Man made emissions?
|
Oh come now Jerome; I know you're smarter than that!
Emissions, as put forth by automobiles, lawn mowers, factories, and, hell, I dunno, probably Republican (and not a few Democratic) political statements, and Dick Cheney's pacemaker which, rumor has it, runs on #2 diesel stored in his frontal lobes.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Debunked-"world wide scientific consensus"
Topic Locked
