Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Intermission Forum - View Post
Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Original thread:
Post 72 made on Monday April 16, 2007 at 11:23
Tom Ciaramitaro
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2002
7,965
Here's an article:

[Link: icr.org]

But, it's not science because it's put out by young earth scientists, right?

(Whoops, there's an MIT scientist's study mixed in there as well. Cancel my above comment.)

[Link: ncpa.org] --- Why aren't all scientists in agreement (the "consensus" we hear about) according to this information??

[Link: americanpolicy.org] --- Is it no longer science because it is contrary to what we commonly hear through the media?

[Link: nationalcenter.org] --- some of the "facts" we hear are not facts at all?

[Link: cato.org] --- are we using the right portions of this century when modeling temperature changes vs. carbon dioxide changes?

[Link: npr.org] --- all these are scientists looking over data, sometimes millions of samples. The top of the story properly indicates that the world view often dictates the results of the "study".

[Link: science.nasa.gov] --- the temperatures over the past two decades may be dropping slightly.

[Link: heartland.org] --- this is written by Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT.

Conclusions in the above article? "...nonscientists generally do not want to bother with understanding the science. Claims of consensus relieve policy types, environmental advocates, and politicians of any need to do so. Such claims also serve to intimidate the public and even scientists--especially those outside the area of climate dynamics."

"...there is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, all you scientists out there, who are you going to believe? Just keep on believing what you want to believe, or read more with an open mind? Who is right? If we collect links to bona fide scientists' studies which support one side or the other, if we get more links to one side, does that mean they are all right and the other side is wrong?

Is it not correct to say that there is NO consensus, but instead that there is HEATED DEBATE??

Last edited by Tom Ciaramitaro on April 16, 2007 12:01.
There is no truth anymore. Only assertions. The internet world has no interest in truth, only vindication for preconceived assumptions.


Hosting Services by ipHouse