Bet They Believe in Global Warming Too

[Kelderek]

Seems like its been changing since the beginning of time...goes through cycles like everything else about life that goes through cycles...I think I need to get away from this...I'm no scientist. Matter of fact never got more than a "D" in science class.

Climate changes follows cycles, that is nothing new and it has been observed, analyzed and to a large degree understood by the scientific community. Scientists are well aware of most of the reasons for this as well. If it just continues to follow the cycles it has for thousands (millions!) of years, nobody would have been concerned.

The reason we are concerned is that climate data doesn't follow the usual cycles right now. Naturally, scientists are curious as to why this is happening. There are theories as to why and those theories are what is debated.
However, the fact that it is happening is not up for debate. It's a fact, regerdless of what posters here try to make us believe.

Something is happening that falls outside of the normal pattern. Should we try to understand why or should we just bury our heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't matter?

[Spector567]

Not so much dumb as uneducated.

If Americans cared more about education than they do about the right to shoot someone because they throw popcorn at them, they would be much more knowledgable than they are right now.

.

Truthfully I think it goes deeper than that.

For many Americans due there political structure have this belief that every issue has 2 EQUAL sides. Right and left. That no matter the topic or the evidence or merit both sides are to be treated and taught equally.

When in reality and in our day to day lives we know not all sides are equal and the should be taught according to there evidence, effort and merit.

This is highlighted very well in the creationism and climate change debate.

[Doctobe]

What is highlighted in the creationism and climate change debates is undeniably a lack of education.

Science is based on identifying possibilities, drilling down into the mechanics of what could make the possibilities factual and then eliminating all of the arguments which could disprove the outcome.

The outcome IS the acceptance of the facts. To argue against that demonstrates a lack of education. IE, a failure to learn.

.

When I first entered the UC system, I didn't really understand what it actually meant to be a scientist. Now that I've been around some of the best minds in their respective fields, what they actually do behind the towering walls of academia is amazing and I hope to be amongst them in a year or so.

For example, most people know what an EEG is. But ask someone about the relation between EEG frequencies and spectral analysis in statistics and you get blank stares.

The SF Bay Bridge was recently remodeled and looks fantastic, especially at night as you drive into the city overlooking the bay. But how was it done? What went into the years of planning and engineering behind it? If SF were to suffer another massive earthquake, what is the probability of the bridge collapsing at a certain richter magnitude? Can that even be determined? If so, how?

I once watched a program about intelligence and whether or not I.Q. is genetic, environmental, etc. In the end, the narrator basically argued that the I.Q. nature vs. nurture debate takes the back seat to a person's individual curiosity and imagination.

Hence as you said, a failure to learn yes, but the scary part in my opinion is the unwillingness of those to even want to learn. How some people deny certain realities is beyond me.

[Administrator]

I believe it. I love America but am annoyed of half the Americans.
Mother Earth is trying to fix herself through climate change.
I hate the phrase 'Global Warming' because the idiots think because there's crazy snow, Global Warming is a fake idea :rotz::rotz::rotz:

[Rusky]

SOME of it is PROVABLE SCIENCE. I accept that. What I was disputing, is the arrogance of the Left that IF you don't accept a current scientific THEORY, you're uneducated or ignorant of the theory.

What I found funny is that they lumped, in that survey, PROVABLE SCIENTIFIC FACTS along with current THEORY (evolution, global warming etc). I understand that you don't see the difference.

You realise that in the scientific world, the term 'theory' refers to something which is so well proven that it is all but fact right? It is only coined a theory to keep people like you from turning around in fifty years and saying OH YEAH YOU SURE FUCKED THAT ONE UP SINCE IT'S NOW WRONG!

A theory is the most solid, proven fact of science. It is not a hypothesis, which seems to be what you think it is.