Generating Climate Science
| 23-10-2015 02:46 | |
IBdaMann ★★★★★(14411) |
trafn wrote:I think, in that respect, that when people are trying to generate climate science, they are often met with resistance because of the implications it has regarding the current way we live. The truth is that when warmizombies preach "The Science," they are naturally met with resistance from people who don't want the religion imposed on them. The destiny of the IPCC:  trafn wrote:Sadly, one way that they react to their fear is by denying the existence of M2C2 (man-made climate change), and will often resort to questioning the very elements which are the underpinnings of climate change science. Sadly, warmizombies somehow misinterpret different viewpoints as "fear". They are confused by their dogma, called "The Science," into becoming convinced that their unfalsifiable dogmababble is actually falsifiable science, and so they refer to non-acceptance of their faith as "denial" and treat these "deniers" with the most rabid of bigotries. There is no reasoning with warmizombies. There is no hope of any intelligent discussion because their dogma prohibits it. Science is the greatest of all threats to their religious sensitivities.  trafn wrote: Naturally, you'd imagine that'd be easy to deal with, as people like you and I are well versed in these foundational elements. As for you and I, we learned the basics about M2C2 a long time ago. Unfortunately, that can mean that we might have a difficult time explaining the basics to someone who either hasn't yet come to understand them The earlier one is indoctrinated in a particular religion, the less tolerant and the less patience one has with those who have not been indoctrinated into that religion. The earlier one is indoctrinated into a religion, the more one believes his/her dogma is the truth, the light and the way, and the more one is threatened by science. trafn wrote: I'm finding as we move in this new direction, that it's getting easier and easier to not be distracted by posts that are either off topic or non-constructive. Said another way, running away from both science and differing viewpoints helps maintain the religious "high" obtained from regurgitating the feel-good "climate" prayers that form a refuge of stability in an otherwise chaotic world. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 23-10-2015 06:44 | |
| Totototo★☆☆☆☆ (117) |
@Tranf, climate scientist What I meant when I asked that, was if it wouldn't be more appropiate to call M2C2 something else. I wasn't denying anything, sorry if it sounded like that. It's just that I think that until we come up with a falsifiable model for this, M2C2 is either a pseudoscience or a theory within an already established science like chemistry. Like the String Theory for example. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and that's what this thread is for. In fact, I chose my career to work on climate change, from a theory perspective and not an established science. |
| 23-10-2015 17:06 | |
| IBdaMann★★★★★ (14411) |
Totototo wrote: It's just that I think that until we come up with a falsifiable model for this, M2C2 is either a pseudoscience or a theory within an already established science like chemistry. Like the String Theory for example. Interesting. What theories have you reviewed that you find compelling? I'd be interested to learn of them. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 24-10-2015 00:29 | |
trafn ★★★☆☆(779) |
@all constructive contributors: - Totototo: M2C2 is simply short hand for "man-made climate change," a phrase I use a lot but get tired of writing a lot. If you want to use your own name like "CCWMOMNBR" (climate change which may or may not be real), that's fine, too. And, yes, there are still many undecided things about M2C2, but enough known where most people have talked to agree that it exists, even if it's not yet fully understood. Ultimately, each person must decide for themselves. |
Join the debate Generating Climate Science:
Related content
| Threads | Replies | Last post |
| The History of Science | 10 | 22-04-2024 16:30 |
| There is still no Global Warming science. | 387 | 28-02-2024 23:50 |
| A Science Test | 18 | 09-12-2023 00:53 |
| Magic or Science | 7 | 06-12-2023 00:29 |
| Science and Atmospheric Chemistry | 6 | 25-11-2023 20:55 |