|
Post by wdmundt on Apr 8, 2008 13:54:56 GMT -4
I guess when you show that science and faith operate on the same terms, then we'll really be getting somewhere. Seriously, though, Jason -- you don't really think science and faith are the same -- do you?
You accuse me of accepting a double standard (I am not) -- and yet you apparently have no standard at all. You are quite willing to accept Jesus and God without anything but conjecture as proof and you are quite willing to bash global warming science with an equal amount of conjecture.
Either offer facts to back up your claim or withdraw it.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 8, 2008 15:06:58 GMT -4
I guess when you show that science and faith operate on the same terms, then we'll really be getting somewhere. Seriously, though, Jason -- you don't really think science and faith are the same -- do you? No. But I don't think belief in human-caused global warming is real science. That was kind of the point in starting this thread in the first place. I think it's a fad. A mass delusion. An unproven theory which appeals because it depicts how the rich and greedy are uncarringly destroying themselves. A way to feel good about the small part you are doing in reducing your personal carbon footprint or energy usage, giving you a chance at virtuous denial of self. It gives a sense of greater purpose. It gives a sense of control, of being in the intelligent and educated crowd who are not afraid to face harsh reality. It's a way to stick it to the Man. In short, it's a conspiracy theory that has received wide-spread legitimacy simply because it's popular and has powerful people behind it, not because it has any proven validity. Prove me wrong. Show me the real evidence that will convince me humans are causing it. So many people believe it that the proof must be out there, right? I have had personal religious experiences that confirm my opinions of Jesus and God, and I continue to have them. I also have the word of thousands of people that I trust and consider reliable experts on this matter as a secondary confirmation. I am not relying on mere conjecture, and I am certainly not relying on blind faith. My faith is in no way blind. It has been carefully informed through the experiences of my ancestors, long experience, and personal trials. I can't prove that humans aren't causing global warming - proving a negative is impossible. Therefore the only way for us to come to agreement is for you to prove to me that we are causing it, and to this point you haven't shown any real ability or desire to do so. Is it because there is no real evidence?
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Apr 8, 2008 16:19:51 GMT -4
Well that is all a nice collection of opinion, but it is woefully short (devoid, actually) of any factual content. I know you think it is a fad, I know you don't believe in it. But why? Why don't you believe in it? What is your evidence that supports your position?
Jason, you are making a claim that goes against what the great majority of scientists say about global warming. You are not a climate scientist. Neither am I. I am not dismissing your claim, I am just asking you to provide some factual support for your claim.
We have been right here before -- many, many times. You have at no point provided any factual support for your claim, except to hold up the claims of kooks and nitwits who have nothing to do with climate science. You have failed to cast any doubt on the scientists working in the area of climate change and global warming.
And with that, unless you or others offer something of factual value, I am done with this thread.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 8, 2008 17:13:02 GMT -4
I'm done with it too, until you provide some real evidence to support your belief. Which it's pretty obvious at this point that you're either unable or unwilling to do.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Apr 8, 2008 17:26:24 GMT -4
Okay, since both of you guys have bailed out, lets congratulate Al on his victory in winning this debate. Way to go, Al.
(sound of clapping)
|
|
Al Johnston
"Cheer up!" they said, "It could be worse!" So I did, and it was.
Posts: 1,453
|
Post by Al Johnston on Apr 8, 2008 19:02:04 GMT -4
Thankyou.
I'd like to pay tribute to all the ... [insert 99-page gushing Oscaresque tribute...]
;D
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Apr 9, 2008 12:00:44 GMT -4
And the music rises . . . .
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 15, 2008 12:10:40 GMT -4
The burden of proof always resides with the person who claims a certain specific thing exists. Those who decline to believe it exists are not obligated to support that with any affirmative line of reasoning. Unless, of course, you're discussing Global Warming. Then, apparently, the burden of proof lies on the person who says it doesn't exist.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Apr 15, 2008 12:33:51 GMT -4
The problem is, Jason, that global warming deniers want to stop the investigation before the scientists can prove (or disprove) that the problem exists. They want to declare that there is no problem before it can even be fully studied.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 15, 2008 12:38:46 GMT -4
I'm not sure about that. Are there really people who don't want it studied at all, or are there simply people who don't want to take preventive measures before their benficial effect is proven?
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Apr 15, 2008 14:07:24 GMT -4
In a continuing effort to get you to provide evidence for your position, let me point out that you are suggesting a thing exists and are providing no evidence to support your claim that a thing exists. You are claiming that belief in global warming is like a religion, yet you have provided:
a. no factual support for the idea that belief in global warming is like a religion.
b. no factual contradiction of global warming science.
I know, I said I was done. I was wrong.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 15, 2008 14:34:59 GMT -4
You are claiming human-caused global warming exists without having provided any evidence for it. I claimed that belief in it is like a religion. That's not a claim that something exists, but that it resembles something else. It only requires my pointing out the similarities, which I did.
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Apr 15, 2008 14:49:16 GMT -4
You've stated a lot of opinions, but have brought forth nothing remotely like a fact. This is your thread.
I listen to conservatives on the radio and on the television all the time saying exactly the same thing you are saying right now. You are claiming that global warming/climate change science is flawed or is a hoax or is a political ploy. But what I never, ever hear from those sources or from you is any factual reason for making that claim.
I didn't start this thread and therefore did not start this thread to prove this or that about global warming science. You started this thread to debunk global warming science. Since starting this thread, all you have offered is conjecture.
If you have a factual case to make, you should bring it forth at your earliest convenience.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Apr 15, 2008 15:04:53 GMT -4
You've stated a lot of opinions, but have brought forth nothing remotely like a fact. This is your thread. I have brought many statements of fact to the table. "So and so said this outrageous thing about Global Warming," is a statement of fact. Those people really said those things. I have merely claimed that I have never seen any evidence that it's real, and that at least some who believe in it also have no evidence that it is real, and resemble religious fanatics in their devotion to it. Hard as it is for you to believe it, no, I started the thread to point out how ridiculous, extreme, and outright scary some believers in Global Warming are. Whether it's true or not has little bearing on whether the conduct of these people is rational. You make a claim that climate change is caused by human beings, but have refused to present any evidence for this. You are the one violating Jay's statment that the burden of proof always belongs to the person who claims that something exists.
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Apr 15, 2008 15:36:52 GMT -4
Repeating crazy, non-scientists' claims about global warming does nothing to provide factual support for your claim. It also does nothing to contradict global warming science. It is very easy to make a list of crazy people in support of almost any idea -- this does not prove anything about the idea, however.
This STILL leaves us with the leading climate scientists on the planet Earth on one side of the issue and you, providing no support for your position, on the other.
|
|