Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DM Schwartz





Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 45
Reputation: 34.4Reputation: 34.4Reputation: 34.4

PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting post at Climate Resistance they may be relevant here

http://www.climate-resistance......yself.html
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DM Schwartz wrote:
Interesting post at Climate Resistance they may be relevant here

http://www.climate-resistance......yself.html

Thanks for posting that. Quote from the last paragraph of the article...

Quote:
Science has never 'worked' by measuring opinion, but by testing hypotheses. It doesn't work by generating orthodoxy, but by challenging it. The IPCC doesn't represent the best available understanding, but the paucity of understanding of the factors governing climate. If the 'truth' really is 'out there' then it doesn't need to be decided by committee.


That pretty much sums it up.

-Mac
peter_puck





Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 82
Reputation: 6.6Reputation: 6.6Reputation: 6.6Reputation: 6.6Reputation: 6.6Reputation: 6.6
votes: 1

PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:57 pm    Post subject: Climate resistance site Reply with quote

From the site:
Quote:

"We decided to test Dessler's claim. So we downloaded IPCC WGII's latest report on "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability""


Now, the IPCC WGII deals with the impact of climate change, not the science of itself. You do not need a degree in hard science to analyze the impact of greenhouse warming on an economy. It would have been silly if that report contained a bunch of physics geeks. Either the person who wrote it does not understand this, or he is trying to mislead people.

Quote:

Science has never 'worked' by measuring opinion, but by testing hypotheses. It doesn't work by generating orthodoxy, but by challenging it. The IPCC doesn't represent the best available understanding, but the paucity of understanding of the factors governing climate. If the 'truth' really is 'out there' then it doesn't need to be decided by committee.


Fair enough, science is not about opinion and polls. But, in the real world, people have to make decisions. I hear people say that vaccines cause autism. I here that power lines cause cancer. Some people say fluoride in the water causes cancer. Of course,more people argue against these statements. So, what am I as an individual supposed to do? What is a government supposed to do ? Do I have the qualifications to say a vaccine does not cause autism ? NO. All I can do is look at the fact that every major medical organization says I should vaccinate my kids.

With Global Warming, I can assume that every country and scientific organization is lying to me, or I can believe there is some truth to all this stuff. It is an easy choice to make. (even if I didn't think some of the anti_AGW stuff is really lame)[/quote]
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2

Goto page Previous  1, 2  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


US Senate: Man Made Global Warming Claims Disputed

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB