Global Warming

[TimberWolf]

You are a cretin. I mean that as a statement of fact not as an insult.
Newton's "Laws" have been superseded/subsumed by Einstein's theories.
The fact that you don't know this is not surprising given that you probably had a Labour Educashun - but a man really should know his limitations.
Try reading the "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Kuhn. Hint: Its not popular science.
Or anything by Popper. Nope. Not popular science either.

Well done for packing so many falsehoods into a small place. I never said Newton's laws had not been superseded. It is incorrect to quote "law" in Newtons laws, as they called called Newton's laws, no quotes. Also, they are not called "Newton's approximations". They remain very much valid and are still taught and used, whether under Labour education or otherwise. The fact that you place regard in work by philosophers of science further betrays your lack of scientific acumen. Scientists don't carry around a book by Kugh like a bible or refer to scientific philosophy, and in my experience regard philosophy as a non-science.

[TimberWolf]

good spinning there. Invent something that the other guy didnt say then attack it
You try to build yourself a fortress that cannot be assailed, so you can never be proved wrong.
A true scientist does the opposite - he builds a theory and says 'come and have a go' PLEASE prove me wrong

I think you know the tune SG ,but you dont know the words

sasguru has a blind belief in things he doesn't understand.

[EternalOptimist]

sasguru has a blind belief in things he doesn't understand.

I want to be clear about this. I do not understand how co2 moves around the planet. I am not sure how the planet compensates for co2 (why has it never gotten out of control before)
I dont know if co2 causes warming or if warming causes co2. I dont know how much of the climate change is man made.

I remain to be convinced.

People calling me a cretin or a holocaust denier is amusing, I just wish they would put more effort into convincing me about AGW. In the meantime, other people are putting up convincing evidence and motives and arguments about why its all hokum. The AGW lobby is definately losing the argument

[sasguru]

Well done for packing so many falsehoods into a small place. I never said Newton's laws had not been superseded. It is incorrect to quote "law" in Newtons laws, as they called called Newton's laws, no quotes. Also, they are not called "Newton's approximations". They remain very much valid and are still taught and used, whether under Labour education or otherwise. The fact that you place regard in work by philosophers of science further betrays your lack of scientific acumen. Scientists don't carry around a book by Kugh like a bible or refer to scientific philosophy, and in my experience regard philosophy as a non-science.

Your ignorance is profound and unassailaible and your logic is non-existent.
The point I was making making is that a "law" should work under all conditions, and Newtons laws don't. They are commonly referred to as laws because prior to Einsteins 2 theories of relativity and quantum mechanics most scientists thought they were unassailable laws - the 20th century proved they were not. So calling them laws is a historical inaccuracy. Newton's approximations is a more accurate description as they work well under certain conditions.

You're trying to weasel your way out of the fact that earlier you got it completely wrong, which makes you not only a cretin but a knave.

As to my "placing regard in philosophers of science", Kuhn and Popper have defined the meta-methodology of science; there is not a single scientist who would dispute that science moves by paradigm shifts. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

[sasguru]

good spinning there. Invent something that the other guy didnt say then attack it
You try to build yourself a fortress that cannot be assailed, so you can never be proved wrong.
A true scientist does the opposite - he builds a theory and says 'come and have a go' PLEASE prove me wrong

I think you know the tune SG ,but you dont know the words

I would love you guys to have a "go at the theory" as you put it. But frankly none of you has the skills.
How come no one has made a credible effort in the whole of this thread? (apart from the link from Diver).
There is no theory in science that cannot be assailed. All of science is an approximation and conjecture and replaced by better theories as we learn more.
But when the anti-AgW crew cite "evidence" from thinly disguised oil company think-tanks and the like, (or fraudulent studies from the Oregon Institute ) it becomes laughable.

[TimberWolf]

Your ignorance is profound and unassailaible and your logic is non-existent.
The point I was making making is that a "law" should work under all conditions, and Newtons laws don't. They are commonly referred to as laws because prior to Einsteins 2 theories of relativity and quantum mechanics most scientists thought they were unassailable laws - the 20th century proved they were not. So calling them laws is a historical inaccuracy. Newton's approximations is a more accurate description as they work well under certain conditions.

You're trying to weasel your way out of the fact that earlier you got it completely wrong, which makes you not only a cretin but a knave.

As to my "placing regard in philosophers of science", Kuhn and Popper have defined the meta-methodology of science; there is not a single scientist who would dispute that science moves by paradigm shifts. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

Where did I get it completely wrong and who told you a law should work under all circumstances? Even Newton knew his laws were limited.

And how long are you going to maintain your delusional fantasy about having the faintest clue about science? You should learn the basics before filling your head with Popper. Be honest, you don't have the vaguest understanding of Newton's laws let alone Relativity do you? Shall we test you on them? We both know where that will lead don't we? Yes, with you squirming and shouting cretin a lot, like the scientist you are

Come on, let's talk Newton's laws or relativity. I'm feeling cruel.

[sasguru]

People calling me a cretin or a holocaust denier is amusing, I just wish they would put more effort into convincing me about AGW. In the meantime, other people are putting up convincing evidence and motives and arguments about why its all hokum. The AGW lobby is definately losing the argument

Really? Please point some out.
I think you're being manipulated by a sophisticated campaign mounted by entrenched interests and are too stupid to realise it.

[sasguru]

Come on, let's talk Newton's laws or relativity. I'm feeling cruel.

OK. Why don't Newton's Laws work at the sub-atomic level?

[TimberWolf]

I would love you guys to have a "go at the theory" as you put it. But frankly none of you has the skills.

Which was my original point. You've blind faith ikn the climate science akin to a religious belief. You don't understand climate science, you just put your faith in certain scientists.

[ratewhore]

Really? Please point some out.
I think you're being manipulated by a sophisticated campaign mounted by entrenched interests and are too stupid to realise it.

I have to say, I'm partly with EO on this. I don't doubt climate change is real. What has not been proven to me is that it is man made. When you have one bunch of scientists in one camp, providing evidence to support their theories, and you have another set of scientists in their camp, providing evidence to support their theories, your layperson such as me is stuck in the middle and left with only one option. Make your own mind up based on the evidence provided.

My own opinion then, is that there is insufficient credible evidence out there to convince me global climate change is man made.

And anyway, there are too many people on this planet. That is the nub of the problem govts refuse to talk about.