Quote from: Spendulus on December 18, 2013, 01:06:52 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on December 18, 2013, 08:12:02 AM

So then STFU about man-made climate change. You have no science to support that question one way or the other. Impossible. You've agreed with me, can't you see that?

No. I've tried to describe actual working of a scientific hypothesis.

That has zero to do with whether I agree with you or there is science one way or the other.

My point was that the investigation of properly formulated hypotheses should be something that people of divergent views can agree is a good thing.

The fact there is not a single hypothesis underlying the global warming (myth, concept, religion, whatever you want to call it) does not mean that the key assertions made are false. This leads into a logical fallacy known as being challenged to refute an irrefutable hypothesis. EG, "prove there isn't a God".

Good luck with that. Consider the mountain, Kilimanjaro that Gore used in his sick movie - he showed it's loss of snow cover, and attributed it to CO2 increases. Well, he was dead wrong - research later showed it conclusively to be caused by land use changes.

A reasonable hypothesis here would have been "loss of snow can be attributed to regional or local land use changes." If that could not be shown in whole or part, then the actual air itself or incoming solar would be possible causes.

My issue is that banning speech whether on private or public, whether by subtle forces or overt rule, would destroy the ability of science to operate as above described. And it has done that.

What I am saying to you is that these are not science precisely because they can't be falsified.

It is no different in that respect than religion. Is denying religion because it can't be falsified irrational? That is why we call it faith and not science. Please learn the distinction.

It is modeling masturbation.

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein.

Meaning we can make models that say exactly the opposite by making different assumptions. That is why it isn't science. Science is something real that can be tested and falsified. How can we falsify that soot from some place is causing ice to increase or decrease some place else? It is only a model and can never be tested. Statistical correlation does not warrant cause and effect. That is a basic tenet of statistical theory.

Quote from: Spendulus on December 18, 2013, 01:12:16 PM

Quote from: Wilikon on December 18, 2013, 03:54:25 AM

....
I decided a long time ago to act in forum the way I talk in everyday's life. I would get abused but never abuse back or censor, and keep it cool.

I realized true believers never need a hammer to nail their ideas to others, never use force. Obvious is obvious. Complicated solutions or explanations last the length of some scientist's grant or their natural life then get forgotten by history.

Yeah. But what happens with theories, or pseudo theories or whatever AGW is, is that if false, they get burdened with more and more rationalizations and explanations until eventually they simply collapse of their own weight.

Politically the problem seems that there's big money in ascribing to airborne CO2 the attribute of evil, and thus instilling guilt in people from producing evil gaseous outputs, and then assessing punitive fines and taxes for this 'justifiable and urgent' crisis.

Basically it's an attempt of governments to assert ownership of the air envelope of the entire world.

Spain even taxes sunlight now. This is an actual law.

The socialism is going to tax everything that moves, until it doesn't move then they will regulate it, then they will spend money to make it move in the most inefficient way.

What is happening to world, it is insane.

Actually this is what happens when socialism (big government) peaks. It always ends horrifically. Look at the chart of the population of Rome, fell from 1.3 million to 30,000 and stayed that low for 600 years.

The socialism is trying to find something else to blame the peak and crash on. Westerners don't want to give up their $150 trillion debt bubble, so they blame it on resource scarcity.

It is so easy for me to see. Because I don't depend on that socialism. I generate my own wealth from my own ingenuity and hard work.

Quote from: compro01 on December 18, 2013, 02:31:45 PM

Quote from: Wilikon on December 17, 2013, 07:27:25 PM

In other scientific news CRYOSAT SATELLITE FINDS ARCTIC ICE INCREASED 50% IN VOLUME

Around 90 per cent of the increase is due to retention of older ice
This years multi-year ice is now around 30 cm thicker than last year
Experts claim increase does not indicate a reversal in long-term trends

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2524770/ESA-satellite-reveals-polar-ice-INCREASED-50-year.html

In other news, the Daily Junk Mail's headlines continue to misrepresent data and the actual experts are correct.

See here. Linked as it seems SMF doesn't like animated images.

Unfalsifiable modeling masturbation. Religion. Irrationality. Insanity. Three Little Pigs.

Please grow up.