Hi, actual scientist here (by training anyway: I have a degree in physics, with as much real-life scientific experience that entails), no political affiliation that predisposes me on this particular issue aside from my basic interest in learning the facts and using empiricism as a tool for determining truth, coupled with a scientist's willingness to believe what the evidence says even if it means changing his formerly most deeply held beliefs. So:
That above comment should win some sort of award for the combination of pomposity and fraudulence. Wow. Totally trying to give an ignorant, misinformed political (not scientific) opinion the weight of scientific truth. It's laughable, you're stating things that are factually untrue, things that even the most truth-averse anti-AGW ideologue lunatic doesn't deny anymore. If you've done even the least bit of anything remotely resembling research, you must have the most powerful case of confirmation bias in the history of science. I mean, you claim to have done all this "research", yet you arrived at the opposite conclusion to a universally held scientific consensus among the very people you claim you consulted. You're disputing things that there is no dispute over whatsoever in your zeal to convince others that you prefer to believe a fiction.
This issue is already settled. There's no controversy over it, except among crackpots, ideologues with a vested interest in spreading misinformation, and those foolish enough to believe the first two.
It's absurd that you try this hard to sound authoritative, as you avoid a reality that most of the people reading your comment are already going to be familiar with. We already know your claims are BS, we've already heard every bit of this nonsense debunked at this point, why dig yourself deeper by trying to sound officious about it? Research? Please, you might be fooling yourself but you're not fooling anyone else. That whole thing where they passed off misinformed Fox News-believing weathermen and sports coaches as "climate scientists" was debunked long ago, the scientific consensus among actual working climate scientists who've published peer-reviewed papers is well established to be unanimous. There is no dispute, except from crackpots, private interests vested in hiding the truth, and those who believe the first two. There is not an industrialized country in the world where the truth about this isn't already widely accepted, except for, imagine that, the ones where Rupert Murdoch has powerful media organizations. Is he a "climate scientist"?
And, hey, say what you want... I know those who propound falsehood will always continue to behave, inexplicably, like if they lie enough, it will become truth. More nonsense won't change anything, however officious in tone. History has already shown your claims to be tripe, based not at all in science but in mere political agitprop. No matter what, that's only going to continue. So protest if you want. It doesn't matter. And nothing you can say will convince me that truth is false or lies are truth, so it'll just be a wasted effort.
Only reason I bothered to reply, myself, is to let you know, just as a helpful tip, that you look pretty foolish. Just so you know,, You can consider it a courtesy.
Ridiculous. Just absolutely ridiculous.
reply
share