Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
5 days ago.
by mythravere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

harryanderson

Well, Tiredofit, cards on the table. Let’s talk about what you see as a gap in my logic and reason. As I understand, the gap you see comes from my believing the Bible on some issues and science on others. And that’s a question I should answer.

Here’s my answer: I take the Bible as my most credible source. After that, I take physical evidence. The Bible and physical evidence often conflict.

The Bible doesn’t directly address every issue; it leaves believers free to decide some issues based on general principles and physical evidence. Climate change is one of these. The origin of man is not one. God clearly states that he created man. So I view the two issues as separate.

When explaining my views, I often quote the Bible. I understand and expect that some don’t accept the Bible as a credible source.

People of faith know that many view us as inconsistent, even hypocritical. The Bible warns us believers to expect opposition and even persecution; it goes with the territory.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Harry lets be clear. I don't have a problem with you personally. I do think you have a huge gap in your logic and reason. I also think you are hypocritical in your views of science in general. I can explain my views and have many times right here.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Harry it wa YOU that brought religion to the topic not I

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

You love to share bible quotes with us despite the fact no one asked, so I wonder what the bible has to say about the age of the earth, care to enlighten us?

Posted 404 days ago.

harryanderson

“I understand why you are reluctant to answer the question as it exposes your hypocrisy on the topic.”

With that comment, you return to your favorite subject. You don’t really want to discuss political conspiracies about climate science, despite the fact that you revived the subject after it had become moribund.

No, you don’t want to talk about political conspiracies at all.

You want to talk about me.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Does the bible support your view that the earth is millions of years old?. Just curious.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Ok so you do agree the world is millions of years old. Posted before I saw your reply.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Harry I am trying to understand your estimate of how accurate science is with their theories. I can see where that gives you pause yet not enough to question the accuracy of this particular theory. Again I ask,, do you agree with me when I say the climate has been changing for millions of years?

Posted 404 days ago.

harryanderson

There’s no sense in my asking the question again. Clearly, you are unwilling or unable to clearly state what your beliefs are, much less defend them. Since you won’t or can’t clarify and defend your views, I can see only 3 options available to me—I can guess at your views and their basis, I can conclude that the issue isn’t particularly important to you, or I can continue to expose your weakness.

None of these 3 options promotes rational discourse. Guessing risks drawing wrong conclusions, expecting a serious answer on an unimportant subject is futile, and continuing to expose your weakness is cruel. Therefore, I see no reason to ask again whether or not you think climate science is a conspiracy to bring about political change.

With that, you are free to ask me anything you like about my views on political conspiracies surrounding climate change.

Posted 404 days ago.

harryanderson

Of course the climate has been changing for millions of years by natural processes. The recent changes caused primarily by human activity, however, are more rapid and therefore threaten a significant portion of the infrastructure we have built.

There you go. You see, I’m unafraid to answer questions. I find it very interesting that you ask a question, and one whole minute later you post, “Why dodge the simple question harry?”

I promptly answered your question, but you haven’t answered the one I asked again and again. You haven’t clearly stated whether or not you think climate science is a conspiracy to bring about political change.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

I understand why you are reluctant to answer the question as it exposes your hypocrisy on the topic.

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Why dodge the simple question harry?

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Harry I say the climate has been changing for millions of years, do you agree?

Posted 404 days ago.

harryanderson

What do carbon dating and the age of the earth have to do with political conspiracies about atmospheric carbon?

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Is it a strawman to ask if you believe the carbon dating of science and the age of the earth?

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

I have little doubt that the climate is changing, as it has been changing for millions of years. You do beleve the earth is millions of years old right?

Posted 404 days ago.

Tiredofit

Not when your argument is that 90% of scientist say so. First, where did that number come from? Secondly, it is NOT a strawman argument when you pretend to believe science when it suits your agenda.

Posted 404 days ago.

harryanderson

I consider the opinion of over 90% of the world's climate scientists to be the best information currently available in the context of a discussion on climate science.

The other issues you raise, like the origin of man, are straw men, and don't seem to have any relevance to a discussion of climate science.

Posted 405 days ago.

Tiredofit

I will ask one last time/ ARE WE TO TREAT SCIENCE AS THE CREDIBLE SOURCE IN OUR DISCUSSION, YES OR NO?

Posted 405 days ago.

Tiredofit

I also imagine there must be a conspiracy to deny the world is millions of years old eh Harry????????????????

Posted 405 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or