Can you?
That was a Reagan quote. Not Dyson.
"As he said" Dyson was speaking of Regan's words.
Who said I was going anywhere? Proving once again that you have a problem with comprehension.
You threw a tantrum on the way out of my lab. Are you really going to hang out and whine now?
As red as yours for repeating a lie to start the thread?
Out of your what?.....Good grief what kind of person thinks this is civil?
KABOOM!!!
Someone has a red face about now....:lamo
Your posts read like a drunk 3rd grader who can't finish his science homework. Am I supposed to handle you with kid gloves?
Are you ever going to get a book on science? Here let me help...
Let me google that for you
You can't prove something is true... bro.
Read Nature. Science. PNAS. The proof is there. Don't fault them because YOU can't/won't comprehend it.
I've given more than one link dealing with it. Each can be followed to answer those questions.
Wow, the nerve....You have the absolute gall to talk about what others read, or don't read that you post links to, that can span from a simple article of opinion that you agree with, to some big study that contains one line in a hundred pages that supports your belief, but you won't post the relevant point. That is pure obfuscation on your part, trying to make yourself seem scholarly when presenting your blind faith in AGW.
You then dismiss anything offered on the opposing argument without even reading it yourself, or in simpler terms when a video is given, and all you have to do is watch it and you don't but instead comment on it attacking the person talking, in this case a commentator, Krauthammer, which I would stand up against you in a debate any minute, of any day of the week, and failing to hear whom he was talking about, or addressing the person, showing your ignorance.
BTW, the person he spoke of Freeman Dyson, probably one of the smartest people on the planet, and an Obama supporter himself for your information...A little background for you....
Now the man speaking himself....
There, both medium's for you print, and video. Now read, and watch before commenting Joe, and try to give an intelligent retort please. Thank you.
yes, he's a bright fellow. But you'd demonize him if he said the opposite. His only attraction to you is he says what you want heard. He still doesn't represent the entire community, not even close. And he is not the only smart fellow in the room.
You should always seek a rebuttal:
Of course, models have been tested against the real world (both today's and eons ago's) and many of Dyson's other objections have been rebutted elsewhere. He also did not address the real world impacts already observed: ice melt, sea level rise, ocean acidification and more. His main concern seems to be that worrying about climate change distracts from more important problems such as poverty and infectious disease. Many might note that poverty (the inundation of Bangladesh) and infectious disease (improved conditions for transmission) are also problems exacerbated by climate change.
But Dyson's purpose seems to be to throw out "heretical" ideas that can then spur further debate. (As even he would admit, his heresies are a little more grounded in the real world when he's talking about nuclear weapons. Before discussing climate change, he told a roomful of people who probably want to put former President Ronald Reagan on Mount Rushmore that the Great Communicator blew a real chance to rid the world of nuclear weapons in 1986 because he was too attached to the "Star Wars" missile defense program.) As he said: "I know a lot about nuclear weapons and nothing about climate change."
News Blog: Freeman Dyson and the irresistible urge to be contrary about climate change
So, J, I dismiss for reason and not arbitrarily. Can you actually read and listen?
Gravity acts on objects at the surface of the Earth.
Are you saying this cannot be proven?
You never to read for comprehension. Always throwing in nonsense. No one is attacking his character. Only noting this isn't his area of expertise, something he admits to. Can't you even recognize this simple truth?
You mean like they agree on science? J, you use that argument with anyone on anything. Including your side. The fact remains, these are scientist who largely take their professions seriously. They are not political ideologues on on a discussion site. The contempt someone you show for science has always amazed me.
He calls himself a heretic, he revels in the title... If you actually knew anything about the man other than the cherry picked portrayal bullet points you've been fed, you would know that he doesn't dispute AGW. He doesn't dispute Co2's role as a greenhouse gas that is warming the planet. To re-iterate some of what Boo said, he just thinks it isn't as important or as big of a problem as the mainstream community does. He also thinks we'll be able to "techno" fix the problem in the future before it gets out of control.
This is all a far cry from your partisan polemic understanding of what he represents as though he debunks the entire notion of AGW as junk science.
This is all nonsense that has been debunked throughout this thread. Along with code and j-mac you also do not understand science, at all.
What science do they all agree on?
I'm still waiting for this mythical survey you seem to think exists somewhere. Have you found it yet?
Why don't you post the silver bullet that will explain all of this?
So far all you've done is rail about how smart you are and refrained from showing anyone why we should believe you.
Hmmm...
This was not a big news story. Must have slipped through the cracks.
No where have I talked about solutions. But that's what makes it political for you. If its true, we might have to adjust. You don't want to adjust; therefore, for you, it can't be true. you'll fight it to your death, not because of the science, but because you don't want to ever have to address the consequences of it being true.
But that's politics. The science is just the science. Nothing more. And scientist don't disagree on it. Its as accepted as gravity. And this is true whether we do anything or not.
And unless you've been hiding under a rock, you know efforts have been made to deal with this. That is what alternative energy is about. No one of consequence has suggest we just stop doing anything. So, I'm not sure what else to tell you. You're wrong about the science. Wrong about who is political. And wrong about what's being done.
Soon after I first started "debating" climate change on here I went and read all the relevant materials cover to cover. Why don't you do the same then come back. Start here.
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Read the AR4 synthesis at a bare minimum.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?