CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted August 9, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 Bingo. That's where the conspiracy is. Well slap my ass and call me "Kyoto"....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mmb Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 Who wouldn't want to ski down the Rockies and end up right in the Pacific? I could have a ski chalet/beach house and sell my home on the ICW and time share in CO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jugghaid Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'm so happy to see more and more people catch on to this bull{censored}. Damn there are a lot of sheep who just swallow it like they are Linda Lovelace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 Or altered business requirements that made your business less competitive than others overseas, causing job loss/plant closings. No! That couldn't be anyone's motivation! You just hate the earth and all of its inhabitants. You selfish, selfish man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Emprov Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 China passed us last year. You're right! They passed the US last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jazz Ad Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 So much for "the science is settled". No such thing as settled in science. No scientist would defend that. It's just a shame that to get an idea through people's mind, it is pretty much required to make a caricature out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jugghaid Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 No such thing as settled in science. No scientist would defend that.It's just a shame that to get an idea through people's mind, it is pretty much required to make a caricature out of it. Nah. Unaltered complete studies without parsing data and leaving out anything contradictory to the agenda of the person(s) trying to prove it (and this goes for both sides) would be sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 No such thing as settled in science. No scientist would defend that.It's just a shame that to get an idea through people's mind, it is pretty much required to make a caricature out of it. Any time I'm in a discussion and I hear that something is settled in science I know I am not dealing with an informed participant and I'm not dealing with a scientist. I've never met a single good scientist that thought anything was settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 No such thing as settled in science.Lots of things in science are settled. That's why we have the word "axiom" in our language. The word "theory" is behind "Global Warming." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 Any time I'm in a discussion and I hear that something is settled in science I know I am not dealing with an informed participant and I'm not dealing with a scientist. I've never met a single good scientist that thought anything was settled.The Earth is round and it travels around the Sun. We have an atom bomb that works. I'd say that is settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 The Earth is round and it travels around the Sun. We have an atom bomb that works. I'd say that is settled. We think we know the shape of the earth and how it travels. We think we know how the atom bomb works. If we are closed off to ever revising our understanding of those phenomenon, we have shut out scientific inquiry. There are a lot of things we think we know that eventually we will no longer believe. As a more practical position, you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 The Earth is round. I'd say that is settled. That's what scientists used to think. Now they believe it is an oblate spheroid. Perhaps it's not really settled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 That's what scientists used to think. Now they believe it is an oblate spheroid. Perhaps it's not really settled Zing! I assume the current thought is the earth has a larger radius near the equator and smaller at the poles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassman1956 Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 The best deterrent to Mankind's impact would be a permanent reduction and limiting of the total world population to something far less than it is, say one tenth of the current numbers. But, it's not PC to talk restrictions on population growth, because all species have the god-given right to reproduce unrestrictedly, including to over-produce offspring until the point of population collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 We are all doomed, I tell you, doomed!!! Could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 Zing! I assume the current thought is the earth has a larger radius near the equator and smaller at the poles? correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 If it is and you think you have the proof positive, why don't you present your case? If not here you can make 100 grand by doing so at Junkscience.com. They're looking for people like you and we need to know. Go get 'em. JunkScience.com, in its sole discretion, will determine the winner, if any, from UGWC entries. All determinations made by JunkScience.com are final. The winner, if any, will receive $100,000 in a single, lump sum payment. JunkScience.com does not promise or guarantee that the UGWC will have any winner. Looks as though they've pretty much guaranteed that there will be no winner. There are no actual criteria, and junkscience.com gets to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 As a more practical position, you are correct.Yes. That was my point. Science shouldn't stop examining what it thinks to be correct and challenging it. That's what you're taking it as being "settled" and I would agree with that. There are also observable truths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 I thought that was the year of the great potato famine.... Nope. In Ireland, it began in 1845. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 That's what scientists used to think. Now they believe it is an oblate spheroid. Perhaps it's not really settled Round/spheroid. Now we're splitting hairs with the general point of my post. Did you know that gun powder ignites when you throw a lit match in it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 There are also observable truths. Lug Sucks.BOALG is a pimp.DRF is dead sexy.etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 Lug Sucks. BOALG is a pimp. DRF is dead sexy. etc. Those facts cannot be disputed. It's settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Funkee1 Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'm not sold on Global woarming, or the polar ice cap melting thing, but...... Can anyone tell me the downside of decreasing pollution, concerving energy and curbing the worlds dependance on Fossil Fuels? Seems like, to me, Whether Global Warming is true or not, the things they are asking us to do are ok............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jackcheez Posted August 9, 2007 Members Share Posted August 9, 2007 Can anyone tell me the downside of decreasing pollution, concerving energy and curbing the worlds dependance on Fossil Fuels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 9, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'm not sold on Global woarming, or the polar ice cap melting thing, but......Can anyone tell me the downside of decreasing pollution, concerving energy and curbing the worlds dependance on Fossil Fuels?Seems like, to me, Whether Global Warming is true or not, the things they are asking us to do are ok............ The downside is personal convenience and competitive advantage in the marketplace if the "rules" are not equally enforced/applied. I am all for decreasing pollution, conserving energy and curbing the world's dependence on fossil fuels, but certainly not because Chicken Little is screaming in my ear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.