Why Climate Change is a Religion and not Science https://www.topbuzz.com/@malcolmshaw/why-climate-change-is-a-religion-and-not-science-CgJAbZ6OOVo
« prev   random   next »

5
9

Why Climate Change is a Religion and not Science https://www.topbuzz.com/@malcolmshaw/why-climate-change-is-a-religion-and-not-science-CgJAbZ6OOVo

By Malcolm following x   2018 Jan 10, 2:26pm 1,446 views   94 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


An article that I wrote on TopBuzz exploring some of my own observations.

https://www.topbuzz.com/@malcolmshaw/why-climate-change-is-a-religion-and-not-science-CgJAbZ6OOVo

I have put out an internet challenge that no one seems to want to take me up on. It is simple. I am agnostic. While I technically fall into the "skeptic" or "denier" category, it is simply because I question the methodology and the politics of man-made climate-change science. I am open to being convinced, but no one seems to be able to provide anything other than future predictions. So, for the Patrick.net crowd, the same challenge I have made before, to please show me one prior doom and gloom climate change prediction that actually came true, or to show me a past and present picture demonstrating rising sea level.

I know the trolls and vicious defenders of man caused climate change will just assume that I haven't looked up the readily available evidence for climate change. Before you attack me, be forewarned that I have probably got considerable evidence to support being skeptical.

Here is a GIF I made of a famous landmark in San Diego. The Coronado Bridge was built in the late 60s. You will notice that the high waterline is pretty much in the same place. I live on the Pacific Coast. It has been alleged that sea level rise is magnified on this coast, yet I can also show pictures much older that again have no noticeable difference on the high water line.



Here is a 130 year span showing no rise at La Jolla Cove.


Source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/01/if-sea-level-was-rising-wouldnt-someone-have-noticed/

« First    « Previous     Comments 81 - 94 of 94     Last »

81   anon_1fe2e   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:27am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I'm curious why I should watch a near 1 hour video of a person who is not a scientist in the field, has no published work on it, and is presumably a self-appointed hobbiest "expert," ..... and from that, you believe I will somehow get all the answers I need. Seriously? What about all the actual scientists working in the field? I can't get the answers from them? They wouldn't be a better source? Yes or no?
82   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 10:32am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Booom!!!!
83   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:33am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Malcolm says
This should take care of most of the criticisms.


Malcom, can we classify you as a greenhouse-effect denier and a physics denier?
84   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 10:38am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

justme says
Malcolm says
This should take care of most of the criticisms.


Malcom, can we classify you as a greenhouse-effect denier and a physics denier?


I would say no. I am a denier of bunk science and organized religions, like alarmist climate change. Please watch the video, then you can classify me however you want.
85   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 10:46am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_1fe2e says
I'm curious why I should watch a near 1 hour video of a person who is not a scientist in the field, has no published work on it, and is presumably a self-appointed hobbiest "expert," ..... and from that, you believe I will somehow get all the answers I need. Seriously? What about all the actual scientists working in the field? I can't get the answers from them? They wouldn't be a better source? Yes or no?


Suit yourself, but anyone who does watch it will either be convinced or at least have a clearer understanding on the technical issues the skeptics have. The reason it is so long is because it is very thorough with backup on every point. I love how being a geologist and someone who worked on the software on weather models, among other impressive credentials, is so easily dismissed as not a scientist in the field. He is certainly qualified to review their methodology.
86   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:50am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

justme says
Malcom, can we classify you as a greenhouse-effect denier and a physics denier?


Please don't classify Malcolm, or any user, at all.

We should be debating facts and not personalities. If you don't like someone, the "ignore" link is right there.
87   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 10:55am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

So there!! :)
88   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:59am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_1fe2e says
ear 1 hour video of a person who is not a scientist in the field


Coming Right Up



Shit, even the title sounds religious, like a Chick Tract.

"No matter how fun the Ouija board is, it's a gateway for Demons! Now Marsha, that's an Inconvenient Truth!"
89   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 11:07am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_1fe2e says
I'm curious why I should watch a near 1 hour video of a person who is not a scientist in the field, has no published work on it, and is presumably a self-appointed hobbiest "expert," ..... and from that, you believe I will somehow get all the answers I need. Seriously? What about all the actual scientists working in the field? I can't get the answers from them? They wouldn't be a better source? Yes or no?

Of course he is gonna believe that over 97% of scientists: It confirms his beliefs.
90   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 11:08am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsPlissken says
Shit, even the title sounds religious, like a Chick Tract.

Funny that no one posted this to prove GW.
91   anon_1fe2e   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:55pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
I love how being a geologist and someone who worked on the software on weather models, among other impressive credentials, is so easily dismissed as not a scientist in the field. He is certainly qualified to review their methodology.

No, he isn't. Having as one of a number of jobs writing some unspecified part of certain software does not put you front and center for evaluating the science of climate change.
92   anon_1fe2e   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 5:08pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Malcolm says
I love how being a geologist...

Hey, maybe you could also explain why you think having a BS in geology is some kind of identifier for expertise in the field of climate change.
93   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 5:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_1fe2e says

Hey, maybe you could also explain why you think having a BS in geology is some kind of identifier for expertise in the field of climate change.

Geologists can see the geologic evidence of constant and sometime drastic climate change. They believe in history.
94   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 5:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Pretty much what anon says. I am surprised by the question, frankly. It is a very compelling video, it is your choice to ignore it. At least click on the link and look at the video at the specified time code, you'll get a laugh. It was something I stumbled across and put them together when I recognized the Daily Telegraph logo.

« First    « Previous     Comments 81 - 94 of 94     Last »


Comment as anon_b8f3a or log in at top of page: