Quote:
Originally Posted by fdpaq0580
I appreciate what I feel is your genuine lack of understanding of the real and substantial physical evidence. No one can give you that which you, for whatever reason, cannot or will not accept. My first suggestion is to look at the fact that 97% of the world's (not just US) scientists believe in human caused global warming is real. That should be clue #1. Is it really possible that this is a world wide hoax by over 200 nations, many of whom don't get along or are at war with one another. Start looking critically at the evidence from both sides of the issue, see which is most convincing, the mountains of data showing it is real, or the smaller, mostly anecdotal or misstatements claims saying it's not real.
Occasionally, Chicken Little is used to discredit a so called alarmist. In a chicken world, who would listen to? The 97% of smartest looking up and warning of the roof caving in, or the 3% with their heads down trying to peck up the most grain saying it's all a lot of bs.
|
So, what you are saying is that you believe OPINION over facts. Since a large gathering of scientists (well paid, I'm sure) have a consensus that man is responsible for Global Warming, not with evidence but just their opinion, then they have you convinced. Sorry, but this jury is not going to accept OPINION. We need facts, and so far no one has shown any/ANY facts that man is responsible. Of course, there are a lot of folks that believe man is a god and that man has the ability to change history, therefore we must be able to change weather cycles, the rotation of Earth and the revolving of the planets around the Sun.
You have not answered my question with evidence, just a statement that you believe someone else's opinion without question. I am not a denier, just waiting to be convinced. I am open for evidence/proof that man has any effect on cyclic climate change. I believe that man is partially responsible for air pollution, but only PARTLY responsible. Sorry, but if I invest a lot of money over a period of decades, for research I expect facts NOT theory and/or opinion. Scientists know that they cannot get a medicine approved by the FDA until they show proof by trials that the medicine really does provide relief for ailments that they advertise. Just because someone spends my money, does not make me gullible enough to accept their assurance that they have an answer for my question. I expect factual evidence. Please don't insult me with your "flat earth" or "denier" accusations and I won't insult you by suggesting that anyone that takes someone's word without proof is gullible or a fool.