First evolution, now greenhouse gas theory (global warming)... what's next, e-mc2?
e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein's proven right
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081120/sc_...
Or maybe someone will dispute gravity?
Maybe, maybe not, but in any case:
YOU SHOULD POST THOSE CONCERNS IN THE CORRECT CATEGORIES SINCE THIS IS CATEGORY "GLOBAL WARMING" AND IT'S MEANT TO DISCUSS GLOBAL WARMING MATTERS "ONLY"
When Einstein put forth his theory of relativity, it disproved much of Newtonian physics. Remember Newton with the apple falling on his head (gravity right). Einstein's theories of gravity overturned Newton. Does that mean Einstein is right. Certainly he was more right. I agree with Dawai though that there is still much to learn. Evolution has always been attacked. The theory of plate tectonics has been "attacked" even though as a geologist I know it is certainly true. As a scientist, I know that evolution is certainly true. I also know that much of geologic history is under attack by ignorant leftists that pretend to be scientists. Do you even have any concept of what "greenhouse gas theory" is. Do be ignorant and gullible. Inform yourself.
Actually the AGW hypotheses is more on a par in provability with astrology and flat earth thinking while the skeptical view is more in line with Darwin and the big bang. One point here is that the mild climate optimum we are currently in happens on a regular basis and is only unusual in that is much colder than normal optimums and has been much slower than normal in getting this warm. What is unusual and has no documentation to support it is the AGW hypotheses and the divergent global warming and adverse climate change religions that have sprung from it. All historical and scientific evidence shows that the climate variations we have experienced over the last 150 years are well within the documented variations of the last 8,000 years of human existence on this world.
About climate optimums
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Wa...
About climate minimums
http://www.stsci.edu/stsci/meetings/lisa...
And absolutely none of the claims made by the promoters of AGW can be supported by the hypotheses they have presented because their mathematical models are unable to reflect the real world variations. They are unable to track the variations in climate because they assume Co2 is a major causative factor in the climate warming when it is actually a minor side affect of it. Other science professionals who are looking for real causes are beginning to find them, but these efforts of hard working scientists are not getting good coverage because they show there is no cause for panic while the AGW promoters desire panic to push their one world political agenda. The rationality of science - Google Books Result::
href=http://books.google.com/books?id=8ECRDjXYMpUC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=What+theories+of+science+will+be+attacked+next%3F&source=bl&ots=6smPw03pDN&sig=9yRXZBi87tNR6J8jCxnCKa7c2Bc&hl=en&ei=XQIkSvznPJ7aswOlx7GNBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=33 class=l onmousedown=return clk(http://books.google.com/books?id=8ECRDjXYMpUC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=What+theories+of+science+will+be+attacked+next%3F&source=bl&ots=6smPw03pDN&sig=9yRXZBi87tNR6J8jCxnCKa7c2Bc&hl=en,,,res,59,)>The rationality of science - Google Books Resultby W. H. Newton-Smith - 1982 - Science - 294 pagesMinimal realism has been attacked from at least two directions. Some, the instrumentalists, deny the appropriateness of evaluating theories with the
http://books.google.com/books?id=8ECRDjXYMpUC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=What+theories+of+science+will+be+attacked+next?&source=bl&ots=6smPw03pDN&sig=9yRXZBi87tNR6J8jCxnCKa7c2Bc&hl=en&ei=XQIkSvznPJ7aswOlx7GNBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=33HOME |
Cardinal Calls Atheist's Theories 'Absurd'| Christianpost.com::
The Christian Post - Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.(JN 8:32) . Next Story : Washington State to Allow 'Dignity' Deaths If you feel attacked by science, it is because you don't understand it,
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20090303/cardinal-calls-atheist-s-theories-absurd.htmHOME |
At risk of being grouped along with the AGW skeptics, I always thought relativity and quantum mechanics were not compatible with one another, and that a "theory of everything" would likely prove Einstein's theories to be wrong or at least incomplete...
Plus, no one really knows what gravity is, why it is so weak or why it should even exist at all. This is an argument I have often used to challenge the skeptics who say AGW is not "proven". Why should we demand proof for AGW when something as fundamental and universally accepted as gravity does not even have a proven scientific basis? We can calculate it sure, but there is no good reason for why the next body of mass we find will not be affected by it, other than the fact that every mass we've found to date has been.
It's hard for a simple person like me to doubt the existence of Gravity. I can easily test it (standing here on Earth) by holding an egg..... letting it drop ..... watching it break.
It's not quite as straight-forward when talking about 'Man-Did-It' global warming. There are too many holes in so-called AGW theory. I find that disturbing.
You forgot about the age of the Earth, people are still saying it is only 6000 years old. No Big Bang Theory.
The theory that oscillations of oceans and the sun do not play any role temperature trends.
Maybe someone will dispute string theory.
Scientific theories should be treated as speculation untill there have been established using the scientific method.
If you have blind faith in a theory, you are using the language of science with the methods of religion. WHAT WILL BE THE NEXT BIG STAGED TERRORIST ATTACK AND WHERE WILL ::
So, where do you think the next big staged terrrorist attack will be, is that there are these continous conspiricist theories, not with any new info,
http://www.bestandworst.com/v/100733.htmHOME |
Heating from carbon dioxide will increase five-fold over next ::
Jan 29, 2009 Too much bad and peurile "science" for my liking these days. 0 (AP) -- Republicans on Saturday attacked the climate change proposal crafted by because they come up regularly when scientists study string theory.
http://www.physorg.com/news152463327.htmlHOME |
All theories have oposition!
Generally the ones that don't work get "attacked." Do you want to be stuck on stupid, or should we correct the things that are wrong?
Probably only the theories that were advanced specifically to support an agenda - like white racial superiority, male gender superiority, and CFCs causing the ozone hole.
PS - gravity is a law.
And the only reason AGW has, despite the lack of evidence, such a following, is precisely that it IS politically convenient.
You better be glad there was some unorthodox thinkers. Otherwise (Keeling) would never achieved his status nor (Einstein). Competitive theories either dispel or explain. (JS) isn't that one of the major functions of science? I would venture a non statistical guess, there's more unknowns in creation then the known.
Here's a little humor to add to your day.
http://www.fixedearth.com/theoretical_sc...
Did you mean "Which" theories? Do you not think it farcical to compare disputing natural temperature shifts with gravity? As for which theory may next be disputed, one can only concur that it is typical that only questionable theories are disputed. As for evolution, consider that the most accepted theories are those that have a long documented history of acceptance. Evolution (and it is just a theory) is relatively new as compared with a few thousand years of documented belief in creationism. That which evolved had to be created in the first place. Gravity?...well that is a weighty subject indeed.
Try any number of theories proposed by the "science" of Astrology.
If a "scientist" were to theorize man is responsible for gravity, I'd expect his theories to be disputed as well. I'd also expect believers of such a theory to point to evidence of gravity as proof of their pet theory.
You forget these theories have stood the test of TIME. The only way for this theory to incortrovertibly pass this test is to wait for the period AGW proponents are saying will pass.
Plus, this theory in not a very good theory scientifically speaking, for a couple of reassons.
i) It is based almost entirely on computer models, which are based on each other, and heavily flawed, so they make the same mistakes
ii) It is unfalsifiable.all sorts of differing effects (e.g floods AND droughts) are being predicted, so how to tell if it's false? every theory must have a set of circumstances that would prove it false. Else, it's like saying there are a million other universes which we can't detect or communicate with. no? Prove me wrong!
Well the thing is that the only reason AGW is attacked is because it's politically and socially inconvenient. We're reliant on fossil fuels, and people are resistant to change. Plus as you know, many political conservatives in the US have turned this into a political issue.
It was similar for evolution. The science there was attacked because it conflicted with religious beliefs.
On the othe rhand, nobody has anything to lose in accepting the gravitational theory or relativity, so laymen have no reason to dispute or attack them.
I don't know what might be attacked next. Maybe some aspect of genetics in order to justify outlawing stem cell research.
 Microsoft Unleashes Visual Studio .NET
 IBM's iPhrase Buy Adds to WebSphere
|
HOME
PRINT
Add to favorites