We're doomed!

[JoeUSooner]

There is a great deal of difference between the true (real, honest, classic, actual, verifiable, "hard") sciences - physics, chemistry, biology, geology, etc. - which can be trusted, and the so-called "soft" sciences, which cannot. Psychiatry, for example, was for a century (even self-admittedly) the "least exact" of all sciences.

But a few decades ago, that 'position of honor' was replaced by a new invention called "climate" science. It cannot be defined, exactly, and does not have any of the usual characteristics of true science. It was just sort of 'discovered' one day, by someone who pulled it out of thin air (or more likely out of their anal orifice). They magically made it fit all their preconceived notions. Worse, all its reports and conclusions are only allowed to be "reviewed" by the "peers" that specifically agree up-front with those preconceived conclusions. That whole canard is intentionally passed off to the public as something to be revered, since it has the (knowingly deceitful) tag of "science" attached to it.

Is it obvious that this subject pisses me off??

 

[Rod Snell]

I agree with Joe. While I was in college getting my two degrees in physics, we called the self-proclaimed "Social Scientists" the " Grape Nuts Socialists." Just as Grape Nuts Cereal contains neither grapes nor nuts, Social Science contains zero science.
They called us the "Ivory Tower Elites", who insisted on verifiable facts, solid math, and reproducible experimental results.

Their approach to what is 2+2? is ask "What do you want it to be?
"
Their response to proof that the average sea level was 200 feet lower in past ice ages and up to 30 feet higher in a previous warm period is "But we know man is causing the problems due to carbon."
Oh really? How did man cause the inland Florida coral reef to grow 30 feet higher than present Miami, a million years ago??!!

And don't get me started on "Political Science"!

 

[TerryMiller]

There is a great deal of difference between the true (real, honest, classic, actual, verifiable, "hard") sciences - physics, chemistry, biology, geology, etc. - which can be trusted, and the so-called "soft" sciences, which cannot. Psychiatry, for example, was for a century (even self-admittedly) the "least exact" of all sciences.

But a few decades ago, that 'position of honor' was replaced by a new invention called "climate" science. It cannot be defined, exactly, and does not have any of the usual characteristics of true science. It was just sort of 'discovered' one day, by someone who pulled it out of thin air (or more likely out of their anal orifice). They magically made it fit all their preconceived notions. Worse, all its reports and conclusions are only allowed to be "reviewed" by the "peers" that specifically agree up-front with those preconceived conclusions. That whole canard is intentionally passed off to the public as something to be revered, since it has the (knowingly deceitful) tag of "science" attached to it.

Is it obvious that this subject pisses me off??

That in bold letters: I think the most notable of "original sources" was Al Gore and the book he wrote entitled "Earth in the Balance." He then expounded on it even more and came up with "carbon credits," which to me are nothing more than paper that he sells to companies or individuals that want to "claim carbon neutrality.

Needless to say, he has gotten rich(er) on climate change and no doubt claims that he is carbon neutral. (Probably only because he has carbon credit certificates filed away in his filing cabinet. With his mansion, he would need those to make the claim.)

 

[HiredHand]

I mentioned it some time back, but I'll repeat it for this thread. Back in 2019, the wife and I took a few days from visiting family in Idaho to go over and travel along the Columbia River Gorge on both the Washington and Oregon sides. During that little trip, I happened to think of "all that water going into the ocean." That prompted the thought of all the other huge rivers in the world dumping water into the oceans. Yet, the enfironmentalists (yes I meant to spell it that way) want to claim that the melting of the polar caps will inundate so much land.

They don't even think of all those rivers dumping water into the oceans 24/7/365, and the oceans don't seem to be rising that much.

Oh boy! I’m pretty sure we covered how this cycle works in 4th science.

 

[golddigger14s]

Global Warming! It topped out at 112 today!

 

[p238shooter]

Global Warming! It topped out at 112 today!

Yep, but we will have it fixed by January 10th. Ha

 

[golddigger14s]

Yep, but we will have it fixed by January 10th. Ha

January 6th