Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine
You're acting like science is religion, where you either "believe" or not.
It's not.
In most cases, science presents you with a large amount of data which will often contain apparent contradictions. Based on that, you can create hypotheses and theories, the likelihood of which you can test with existing data and new experiments. This, however, will never lead to absolute certainty, since absolute certainty in science is epistemologically impossible.
So instead, you usually end up with a number of competing theories, with varying degrees of likelihood. Eventually, more observations and experiments will eliminate a number of those theories and corroborate one or more others. That will point you in the right direction, and increase chances of those theories and newer ones corresponding with reality, but it will still not lead to absolute certainty.
The problem with the view you express here is that you believe something to be true, and see that as a reason to ignore the possibility that you are wrong.
That is not sound scientific thinking.
Now, you did mention in a previous post that you think that AGW is "at present undecided". Treating a matter you consider to be undecided as if it were a decided matter hardly seems like a good idea, because if it actually is undecided, then there's a chance that your view ends up being incorrect  |
I am done talking to you on this. All you are doing is taking key statements in my posts and taking them out of context. If what you just said was true then why did I add this at the end of my post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkland
The outcome? There are far more (I only listed a few) facts that would cause one to lean towards a natural global warming trend rather than man made global warming.
What I DO agree on, if we don't curb our polluting these things may change. It is idiotic that we have take giant leaps in technology but our energy source and technology is no better than it was 100 years ago.
|
I say there is more data for these events being cyclical rather than man made RIGHT NOW. See what I highlighted in red? By your very post that I quoted, I HAVE come to my OWN conclusion based on evidence I have collected. Just because I use the word believe does not equate my rationale to backwards religious zealotry. I am an amateur but I can point you towards MANY MANY scientists who believe the EXACT same thing.
If I see other evidence to the contrary I will change my views and opinions, just as all others will. I have no problem with that. I am well aware of the changing nature of theories. I have seen some new evidence lately that may force me to reconsider but as things stand today I am unchanged in my views.
I am sorry you seem to be offended that I have a differing opinion than yours.
__________________
"The towers are gone now, reduced to bloody rubble, along with all hopes for Peace in Our Time, in the United States or any other country. Make no mistake about it: We are At War now -- with somebody -- and we will stay At War with that mysterious Enemy for the rest of our lives." H.S.T. 09/12/01