• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

OMG "All the scientist" were WRONG.

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,697
Reaction score
5,704
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
After Mt St Helens erupted all the scientist said it would take 100s of years to recover, they were wrong. Imagine THAT! :lol:

"When Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980, scientists tried to apply longstanding theories to predict the recovery of plants and animals. It turned out that nature was a difficult teacher.
``We were wrong at least 50 percent of the time.'' - Larry Bliss, professor of botany, University of Washington.
``Biologists were totally blind-sided by the eruption on May 18, 1980.'' - Jerry Franklin, professor of forest resources, University of Washington.
``Conventional wisdom said that fish shouldn't have survived (in streams choked with silt and heated by the volcano). But they did.'' - Jim Sedell, Forest Service researcher, Corvallis, Ore.
``To our amazement (two contradictory theorized processes of how recovery should take place) occurred within a meter of each other.'' - Jim McMahon, Utah State University biologist.
The comments came during a recent visit to the devastated area arranged by Reps. Jolene Unsoeld and Sid Morrison, whose congressional districts share the volcano. The tour was designed to draw attention to the need for continued study of the recovery, which, in many ways, has astounded scientists."

Living | Mount St. Helens Aftermath: Mother Nature Has Fooled US | Seattle Times Newspaper
 
Those stupid scientists! What do they know anyway! Who needs Science?
 
Is there a message here when it comes to AGW (renamed "climate change" when the original predictions didn't work out)??
 
Stupid scientists! Don't try to tell me I came from a monkey - I ain't come from no monkey!
 
After Mt St Helens erupted all the scientist said it would take 100s of years to recover, they were wrong. Imagine THAT! :lol:

"When Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980, scientists tried to apply longstanding theories to predict the recovery of plants and animals. It turned out that nature was a difficult teacher.
``We were wrong at least 50 percent of the time.'' - Larry Bliss, professor of botany, University of Washington.
``Biologists were totally blind-sided by the eruption on May 18, 1980.'' - Jerry Franklin, professor of forest resources, University of Washington.
``Conventional wisdom said that fish shouldn't have survived (in streams choked with silt and heated by the volcano). But they did.'' - Jim Sedell, Forest Service researcher, Corvallis, Ore.
``To our amazement (two contradictory theorized processes of how recovery should take place) occurred within a meter of each other.'' - Jim McMahon, Utah State University biologist.
The comments came during a recent visit to the devastated area arranged by Reps. Jolene Unsoeld and Sid Morrison, whose congressional districts share the volcano. The tour was designed to draw attention to the need for continued study of the recovery, which, in many ways, has astounded scientists."

Living | Mount St. Helens Aftermath: Mother Nature Has Fooled US | Seattle Times Newspaper

We should totally get rid of scientists.
 
You see that is the beauty of science and scientists. When they are wrong they will freely admit it, take the new knowledge and move on with the fresh information and make better predictions the next time.
Religions and republicons will never learn as they stubbornly cling to obviously wrong conclusions and revel in their dogmatic ignorance of the world.
It should be noted that there never was an agreed consensus among scientists about a recovery time for the Mt St Helens forest. The predictions were disparate and varied in timeline and mechanisms for recovery.
 
Last edited:
THAT is what you get from this? Keep drinking the Kool aid, it's yummy!

Meh, other people said the same thing. The real lesson from the Global Warming debate is that we shouldn't politicize science.
 
You see that is the beauty of science and scientists. When they are wrong they will freely admit it, take the new knowledge and move on with the fresh information and make better predictions the next time.
Religions and republicons will never learn as they stubbornly cling to obviously wrong conclusions and revel in their dogmatic ignorance of the world.
It should be noted that there never was an agreed consensus among scientists about a recovery time for the Mt St Helens forest. The predictions were disparate and varied in timeline and mechanisms for recovery.

So when the scientist admit they were wrong about AGW after we destroyed our economy and way of life based on their false assumptions ...... Point is the "all the scientist agree" argument is a joke and the Mt St Helens example proves just that.
 
Anybody who happens to follow the long-term weather forecasts on a regular basis would be well aware that climate science in the short term is an educated crap-shoot and in the long term is about as reliable as a tarot card reading.
 
So when the scientist admit they were wrong about AGW after we destroyed our economy and way of life based on their false assumptions ...... Point is the "all the scientist agree" argument is a joke and the Mt St Helens example proves just that.
Your example proves absolutely nothing other than your politically motivated selective ignorance on the subject.
The projected recovery period of post volcanic ecosystems and easily measurable climate changes are not even remotely related sciences.
Reducing pollutants in the atmosphere we live in can never be a bad idea. Your false assumption that our "way of life " and economy would be destroyed if we took action are equally erroneous predictions
The opening of the polar northwest passage from global warming is proving to be a boon to international shipping companies.This is one industry that is welcoming global warming with open arms.
The Financial Times reports that, as of Friday, 204 ships had received permits this year to ply the Northern Sea Route, which connects East Asia to Europe via the waters off of Russia’s northern coast. Last year, just 46 vessels made the trip. Two years ago, the number was four.
As Arctic ice melts, full steam ahead for shipping?
 
Last edited:
THAT is what you get from this? Keep drinking the Kool aid, it's yummy!

****ing A! Wut? You think we done did come from mun-kees or sumfin? Dem "scientists" be lying! Don't nuthin fool me tho!
 
You still don't get it, the lesson is from the Mt St Helens "scientific consensus" debacle.

So get rid of the scientists, obviously you and your hindsight know better.
 
So when the Republicans admit they were wrong about AGW after we have destoryed our environment and our way of life forever...
So when the scientist admit they were wrong about AGW after we destroyed our economy and way of life based on their false assumptions ...... Point is the "all the scientist agree" argument is a joke and the Mt St Helens example proves just that.
 
Is there a message here when it comes to AGW (renamed "climate change" when the original predictions didn't work out)??

No, because it's not the same phenomenon and the scientists in question are from different disciplines. There's only a message if you are intending to attack science in general.
 
That what will happen if those "green" people make it so they cant cut down entire forest and drive thier SUV's.
PHP:
Wait ... what ... ??

Exactly how did that destroy our economy or way of life?
 
Your example proves absolutely nothing other than your politically motivated selective ignorance on the subject.
The projected recovery period of post volcanic ecosystems and easily measurable climate changes are not even remotely related sciences.
Reducing pollutants in the atmosphere we live in can never be a bad idea. Your false assumption that our "way of life " and economy would be destroyed if we took action are equally erroneous predictions
The opening of the polar northwest passage from global warming is proving to be a boon to international shipping companies.This is one industry that is welcoming global warming with open arms.

As Arctic ice melts, full steam ahead for shipping?

My example proves that scientific consensus means nothing and that science is never "settled". If some guy at Mt St Helens 30 years ago spoke up and said it would recover in 20 or 30 years he would have been called a nut maybe even a denier and laughed off the mountain. See the parallel here?
 
My example proves that scientific consensus means nothing and that science is never "settled". If some guy at Mt St Helens 30 years ago spoke up and said it would recover in 20 or 30 years he would have been called a nut maybe even a denier and laughed off the mountain. See the parallel here?

Actually, what your example proves is that scientists gain more clarity the more they study a phenomenon.


And AGW theory is 40 years old and been extensively studied. The more we study it, the more sure we are that it is real.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...ming-is-caused-by-humans-impacts-speeding-up/
 
Actually, what your example proves is that scientists gain more clarity the more they study a phenomenon.


And AGW theory is 40 years old and been extensively studied. The more we study it, the more sure we are that it is real.

New IPCC Report: Climatologists More Certain Global Warming Is Caused By Humans, Impacts Are Speeding Up | ThinkProgress

Here's another parallel. Thirty years ago scientist said Mt St Helens would take hundreds of years to recover and it is recovered now. Thirty years ago scientist said there is a direct correlation between C02 in the atmosphere and the earths temperature. Now however after the C02 levels have soared, the rise in temperature has taken a 15 year vacation.
 
What if the Republicans are wrong and there really is man created global warming? Should we not be good stewards fo the earth until we are sure?
Here's another parallel. Thirty years ago scientist said Mt St Helens would take hundreds of years to recover and it is recovered now. Thirty years ago scientist said there is a direct correlation between C02 in the atmosphere and the earths temperature. Now however after the C02 levels have soared, the rise in temperature has taken a 15 year vacation.
 
Those stupid scientists! What do they know anyway! Who needs Science?

It's funny watching the shades of grey folks always run to the black&white straw man arguments.
 
We should totally get rid of scientists.

No, we should recognize scientists who practice unbiased scientific principles for the sake of discovery and discount those who have an agenda and call themselves scientists to force their agenda on others. Any reasonable scientist would look at "evidence" such as the hockey stick model with skepticism understanding from history that sharp and radical departures of long term data is unusual and should be investigated before being accepted as absolute.
 
Back
Top Bottom