home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.skeptic      Skeptics discussing pseudo-science      95,770 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 95,440 of 95,770   
   JTEM to Dawn Flood   
   Re: Gwobull Warbling: Follow the money   
   21 Jan 26 14:32:25   
   
   XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.atheism   
   From: jtem01@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/20/26 11:53 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:   
   > On 1/19/2026 10:05 PM, JTEM wrote:   
   >> On 1/19/26 8:18 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 1/19/2026 7:55 AM, JTEM wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> It's not science. In science, when your hypothesis is falsified   
   >>>> it's discarded. In climate hysterics, you double down.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> These aren't just words. I don't make up shit like you do. This   
   >>>> is how science works, and climate hysterics does not work this   
   >>>> way. It fails to meet a basic definition of science.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Then, let's assume   
   >>   
   >> "Then," what?   
   >>   
   >> Are you acknowledging that falsifiability is a basic tenant of   
   >> science?   
   >>   
   >> Yes or no?   
      
   > Duh!  But, you have not presented a testable hypothesi   
      
   Other than the fact that we are inside of an ice age -- the Quaternary   
   Ice Age -- and it's characterized at this stage by a   
   glacial/interglacial cycle with us presently inside of an interglacial   
   which is overdue to end.   
      
   "Other than that," you mean. Right?   
      
   But you have presented a testable hypothesis. And it's been falsified.   
   And that's the point. CO2 does not control our climate and has not   
   caused it to be unnaturally warm.   
      
   > rather, your   
   > "it's always natural variability" is not falsifiable.   
      
   It can't be falsified BECAUSE IT'S TRUE. You can look back at the   
   past and see many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many periods   
   were CO2 failed to produce the rise in temperatures you require. You   
   can see instances where a rise in CO2 has FOLLOWED a rise in   
   temperature -- warmth raised CO2 levels, not the other way around --   
   and you can see periods which much lower CO2 levels and higher   
   temperatures.   
      
   We can see the very premise of your climate hysterics falsified.   
      
   We can see predictions of your pseudo scientific idiocy falsified.   
      
   Glacier National Park?  All the glaciers were supposed to have   
   melted five years ago!  The Maldives?  They were supposed to be   
   underwater... was it 8 years ago?   
      
   Snow was supposed to already be a thing of the past.   
      
   The north pole still has ice. Sorry.   
      
      
      
   --   
   https://jtem.tumblr.com/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca