It's mathematically impossible to prove AGW (anthropogenic global warming) even *exists*. It's a tenet of faith, not science -- which is why we always hear about "consensus," which in itself is the business of opinion, not hard fact.
image image
11 comments
Meanwhile, the terabytes of data crunched daily by the likes of Britain's Meteorological Office, which is shared with similar organisations around the world: it is to their mutual benefit to do so.
If the precise numbers processed by the even more exact science of supercomputers more than prove the facts that face us, can you do the maths, 'Doc'...?!
...after all: you're using what would be considered a supercomputer by those who used room-filling mainframes in the 1960s/70s.
Exact science has a rather nasty habit of destroying more than just 'Opinions' like that y'see, OP.
Alright, show your evidence of that, then. Go on and publish all your research on the topic. Or better yet, shut the fuck up and don't come whining when the climate collapse starts wrecking your shit.
I mean, theoretically correlation doesn’t imply causation… unless there is a well-known causative link between the two factors. Guess what! We found multiple decades ago that CO2 is a gas that can cause a greenhouse effect if pumped into the atmosphere in high degrees, and in contrast to water vapor it stays there for quite some time. The only sources of CO2 emission that weren’t there before the start of noticeable climate change are man-made. Scientific consensus is also not simply a few scientists sitting around and arbitrarily deciding what’s true. Nor is all of this a tenet of faith (what kind of faith would that be?). Climate change being mostly caused by human influence is the best model that we have, all alternative models were unable to explain what we are witnessing to a better degree. Climate change denial on the other hand is ABSOLUTELY not based on anything but the faith of its believers in one way or the other. So this is once again a case of projection.
Projecting much, Not-Doctor Luke? The faithful climate change denialists are going so far as to invent jewish space lasers to explain away the increasing forest fires. “Mathematically impossible” my ass, do you even know what mathematics is ?
Given that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that its concentration rose since Industrial Revolution, along with global temperatures and various extreme climatic events, we can say we have pretty much enough evidence for this.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.