Well meaning idiots

[dang65]

simple. I believe that the theory of evolution is correct, but I hold that belief irrespective of the number of scientists who agree. You seem to think this is some sort of popularity contest, I suspect you are easily led and a 'cushion'.

i.e. you bear the imprint of the last @rse that squashes you

So, I take it you have a lot of respect for the creationists and god-believers then? I mean, they've made up their own minds and won't be distracted by this overwhelming evidence nonsense.

Obviously you are entitled to make up your own evidence and persuade yourself that catastrophic climate change isn't coming, but don't expect rational people to nod along with you. From our point of view, people like you are nutters, that's all I'm saying.

[EternalOptimist]

So, I take it you have a lot of respect for the creationists and god-believers then? I mean, they've made up their own minds and won't be distracted by this overwhelming evidence nonsense.

Absolutely. I do respect them, whilst believing that they are wrong.

I'll tell you something else, I have met and debated with some of these religious types who are far cleverer and saner than I am, so their belief is nothing to do with brains or sanity. Calling them nutters because of their belief is just plain wrong.
There is something else going on in the human brain, that, so far, is not explained. I just hope that it's them thats wrong and not me

[ace00]

3. Peer review is not in any way equal to scientific method. Never has been, isn't now.

That's 3 for you warmers to respond to. Go ahead.

[FSM with Cheddar]

How do you you people manage to reconcile having total belief in the theory of evolution, which the vast majority of scientists support, whilst simultaneously ridiculing anyone who believes in the theory of climate change... which is also supported by the vast majority of scientists?

WHS

simple. I believe that the theory of evolution is correct, but I hold that belief irrespective of the number of scientists who agree.

EO - Your general knowledge is great, but your science is poor. If you hold a belief regardless of scientific evidence then you are a bigot, not a free thinker.

[dang65]

Calling them nutters because of their belief is just plain wrong.

I'm not calling them nutters. I'm calling you a nutter.

[FSM with Cheddar]

2. Models: Urban Heat Island effect is greatly understated in AGW models. As is natural climatic variability (you know, sun, orbit, oceans, that kind of stuff). The source code (Fortran I think) has been analysed and found to be ...tulip. Various "adjustments" used in models are un-substantiated. I could go on. Therfore the models are GIGO rubbish or in CUK speak TITO (Tulip in Tulip Out)

No one has ever said that we rely entirely on computer models to support global warming.

Scientists from disparate fields are all finding that the overwhelming evidence is pointing to climate change.

In fact at the moment most computer models are underestimating the rate of change going on in climate.

[EternalOptimist]

WHS



EO - Your general knowledge is great, but your science is poor. If you hold a belief regardless of scientific evidence then you are a bigot, not a free thinker.

Again, I differentiate between scientific evidence and the number of people who hold a belief. (in this case, 'most scientists')
It is not a popularity contest and I find that when you follow the herd you are wading through a lot of sh 1 te.

[ace00]

I'm not calling them nutters. I'm calling you a nutter.

Thanks for the scientific response. I rest my case.

[EternalOptimist]

I'm not calling them nutters. I'm calling you a nutter.

Well, it's not the first time my sanity has been questioned. Lets just say that I am not easily persuaded and not a single one of the questions I have asked has been answered by the AGW fanatics


quote - You're exactly like those nutters that believe in creationism
get it right.

[Svalbaard]

How do you you people manage to reconcile having total belief in the theory of evolution, which the vast majority of scientists support, whilst simultaneously ridiculing anyone who believes in the theory of climate change... which is also supported by the vast majority of scientists?

I can't understand how it's the same people that do both things. You've basically made up your own mind about climate change and choose to completely ignore scientific research and evidence. You're exactly like those nutters that believe in creationism.

And don't claim that there are thousands of scientists that dispute climate change. Scientists will always question and challenge theories. That's what they're there for. But the evidence is overwhelming and is demonstrated over and over again.

The loss of human life and the changes in living standards of those that do survive will be vast, far outnumbering current levels of death from poverty or disease. How do you fail to see that?

I was going to put together a response to your drivel above but I simply can't be bothered. I hope that most CUKers would consider your ramblings above as ill conceived tosh so I'm happy to leave it at that.