Create account

John_Doe
replied 2718d
Please tell me you dont base your knowledge off of tv nonsense.
replied 2718d
No I don't, but you asked for the info, and that is an easy place to find it. That said Cosmos was not TV nonsense. It was knowledge presented by a scientist.
John_Doe
replied 2718d
Fair enough. I will look into it.
replied 2718d
On what should people base their knowledge?
John_Doe
replied 2718d
Proper research that refers to sources that you can check etc. Has discovery channel ever presented any criticism to global warming. If they have it is just as a strawman.
replied 2718d
Why does global warming deserve to be criticized? Does any serious, professional and reproducible research refute it?
John_Doe
replied 2718d
You have to define it first. Are we talking the natural change in the worlds climate? Global warming/climate change caused by humans?
replied 2718d
No one has seriously refuted anthropological climate change. The evidence for it is quite conclusive.
John_Doe
replied 2718d
replied 2717d
I have read a lot of the propaganda against the science. There is nothing behind it. Like that list of "scientists" that don't belive in global warming turns out to be regular people.
John_Doe
replied 2717d
It says 9000 phds. Dis you see how the 99% was manipulated? Anyway, ask why the narrative was changed from global warming to climate change.
replied 2717d
Those phD's aren't in a relevant field. Their opinions are worthless. Research and data are what matter. It was not a narrative change. Just that it involves more than than warming.
John_Doe
replied 2717d
Is it warming or cooling, cant be both.
replied 2717d
It can be more complicated then that though. The issue is the excess energy in the system due to an albedo imbalance. The extra energy usually is noticed as more heat, but not always.
Barricade
replied 2718d
Everything deserves to be criticized, as long as you have enough evidence to refute it.