Democrats say that the “science is settled” regarding man made climate change. Is such a saying unscientific in itself, because it assumes that no new ideas or knowledge will be discovered?
Waiting for your question where you argue logic of gravity.
Hey, nothing is settled, right?
Your point is already addressed below
No, it’s unscientific because it’s completely false.
The only point of that phrase is to shut up the idiots who think they know more than the VAST majority of the world’s scientists. Not just climate scientists. It’s really not a debate at this point. Like, you are free to argue against Newton’s laws, but they are accepted as facts just like the facts concerning climate change. Saying the “science is settled” is basically saying the experts are debating very much, which they aren’t.
SD ... yep, you’re a fascist.
Fake News. I have never heard a Democrat say it was settled science. I’ve only heard Republicans and Conservatives claim Democrats say it.
Obama said it.
“The shift to a cleaner energy economy won’t happen overnight, and it will require tough choices along the way. But the debate is settled. Climate change is a fact. And when our children’s children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world, with new sources of energy, I want us to be able to say yes, we did.”
(Add the stutter for authenticity)
Lol I was just about to say the same thing
Where Obama say it was “settled science?” Can you provide an example?
Really? I don’t see the words “Settled Science”
there was just a report yesterday that the hole in the is onzoe layer is the smallest since 1988.
You mean like years ago scientists recognized that certain man-made organic aerosols were adversely reacting with the Earth’s ozone layer and despite any lingering scientific studies and findings, politicians recognized the danger of inaction and governments worked together to limit the use and release of those substances? ...lucky no one was able to use a juvenile semantic argument to stop what needed to be done.
Al Gore’s stupid pyramid scheme has been debunked.
I don't think that most Democrats say or think that.
I came here to say that
Yeah, I hate sweeping statements like this.
President Obama said the debate was settled during his 2014 State of the Union.
He might have said that, but I still don't think most Democrats think this way. Yes, most Democrats believe in man influenced climate change. But, I believe that most Democrats are open to new scientific research regarding the topic.
I hope so. They seem to get angry when questioned. I’m only basing that statement on the last SOH poll regarding climate change, so it’s really directed towards SOH members - I can’t back it up when it comes to everyday people (although I do believe it to be true).
I didn't read that poll. I'm sure there are some that are stuck in their ways. Hopefully, not too many.
It wasn’t as bad as the abortion or religion polls (those are the best 🙂 ).
"Epic" is what I call them. 😀😀
Real scientists know there’s no such thing as settled science. The also know consensus is irrelevant to the truth.
Science is based on decades of data and resultant facts. I know it’s hard for Trump supporters to acknowledge facts
I can’t even figure out where to begin correcting you.
So you want to adjust facts to support your position
No. I just couldn’t figure out which of your mistakes to address. And then I let it go because I realised I didn’t even care.
Not settled forever, settled until new data suggests otherwise. But it isn’t a scientific statement, it is a political one. The science on the subject is ongoing, and the evidence is becoming increasingly clear.
I agree that science has become politicized especially with MMGW. The very term consensus is a political term, not a scientific one.
I guess so, the same way saying the science of gravity is settled. There's still some questions about it, but you can be pretty certain what will happen if you jump out of a plane.
Newton’s law of gravity has been proven false by Einstein.
Yes. Your body is denser than the air so you would naturally fall.
Kscott are you a gravity denier too?
Newton’s law of gravity states that gravity is a force. This is a good approximation for what happens on earth, but Einstein’s theory of general relativity produces more accurate results. The math is much more complicated doing it the Einstein way, so Newton’s law is still taught, just with a disclaimer now.
Voc, can you explain gravity and how it works?
Nope! But I also can’t explain photosynthesis. That doesn’t mean it isn’t real.
I'll let you look it up from an expert and get back to me.
How does my understanding of how gravity works determine if it’s real or not?
I said to get the answer from an expert.
What is gravity and how does it work? You're claiming it's real so there should be plenty of solid answers for it, right?
I’ll look on you tube. That’s always reliable.
Is there a reason you can't seem to fins a reliable expert on your own? Maybe Neil Degrasse Tyson? Let me help.
Can measure with it? Can predict with it? I can easily predict that masses with higher density than the surrounding atmosphere will fall. That has nothing to do with gravity.
However, gravity is supposedly strong enough to keep water stuck to the earth's surface yet smoke rises. Have you ever observed water clinging to a wet, spinning ball? That's a real experiment you can do.
Nothing is settled regarding climate change. Many Democrats and liberals get very pissy if you even question their beliefs. It is like some extreme religion with some of these folks. Crazy.
Really? You ever question the beliefs of a conservative? Try it sometime. You’ll get the same reaction, then get called a snowflake.
I have frequently. Same crazy on different subjects
Emily Brewster, lexicographer and associate editor at Merriam-Webster, found what she believes is the earliest use of snowflake as an epithet: Early 1860s in Missouri, as the Civil War began and citizens battled over whether or not slavery should continue within the state. “A snowflake was a person who was opposed to the abolition of slavery,” Brewster said. “They were called snowflakes because it said they valued white people over black people.”
Snowflakes on the left of me, more snowflakes on the right, here I am stuck in the middle with you. 😉
Those people don't know what they're talking about.
Not only that but they are actually arrogant enough to redefine terms, science for instance, to fit their own contorted beliefs. There is at least one person on this app who claims that science is never wrong!
You are correct and many who say all scientific theories are facts, which is wrong.
Yes. It attempts to discount the basic scientific principal of skepticism.
Sure, but still. Another basic tenant of science is you have to assume what you now think to be true, is true. We can't just go on with our lives ignoring global warming now that it is a scientific consensus.
Science isn't a popularity contest, it's a method.
Yes. “Settled science” is science denying.
Many on the left say things like that or call others science deniers because they think it silences and ridicules people. If you can keep people with different opinions from speaking up, you don’t have to debate them. It’s a similar strategy to when they call others racist, it’s meant to end the conversation, not advance it.
Like most fascists, they don't want debate, only to force compliance to their agenda.
Here’s the thing, science doesn’t give two shits about your opinion. Science is based on facts. Calling for idiots who want to give their uninformed opinions to be silenced is productive on the whole.
Now, what the science deniers need to get through their thick skulls is the fact that their opinions don’t matter. At all. If you come to some amazing scientific revelation, tell the experts. Until then, just stfu.
If your doctor and everyone in the hospital said you have cancer, would you find the one person who’s gonna tell you you don’t have it just to make yourself feel better? That’s what climate change denial is.
SD .. thanks for presenting your fascist views for all to see. You hilariously suggest that science is an entity that has feeling so as to care or not care about an individual’s opinion.
The fact is that science isn’t a thing that would care. That’s just a figment of the leftist imagination.
Science is the inquisition of all ideas. Fascism is the exclusion or outlawing of the “wrong” ideas.
Haha epic meltdown, Sd. You’re really emotional about this. I think I’ll run my air conditioner a bit longer this season in your honor.
SD ... nobody denies that the climate changes. The problem is that climate alarmists wrongly “diagnose” a common cold as cancer.
Science doesn’t care about your opinions. That’s a fact. If you can’t interpret those simple statements, I can’t help you, Think.
Xxx, I really don’t care about your electric bill or about how much of an idiot you choose to be by denying science. That’s on you, bud.
Maybe on the 8th, when you’re helplessly screaming at the sky in outrage, you can scream for an extra 30 seconds...because we all care about your opinion obviously. Or, you can stfu and silently fret that we pulled out of the Paris Agreement. Either way.
Think, also, that saying is paraphrased from Neil DeGrasse Tyson. One more expert who doesn’t care about opinions.
Yes that’s what I do 🙄
Come on, I’m a smug liberal, I laugh at you and think I’m better than you. Lmao.
SD ... I’ll try to simplify for you ... science has no feelings whether to agree with your twisted views or not agree with those silly thoughts.
Unlike you, I don’t look to science to give me a gold star to endorse my opinions. The fact is that you’re wrong.
That doesn’t really matter Sd. Feelings only matter to one side here (and it isn’t ours).
Think, I’d recommend you pick up literally any science textbook and read the first chapter on the scientific method. Also, I know you’re not so dumb as to not understand my personification of “science”.
I’ll say it again in case the kids in the back didn’t hear -SCIENCE DOESN’T CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS.
SD ... I’ve spent 30 years as a scientist. I learned the scientific method in the fall of 1975, and am well aware of its application.
I say again, that much to the chagrin of snowflake leftists, science does not have feelings — either for or against any ideology. Science is ever evolving and dependent on the constant questioning of ideas. The one thing that is certain to stifle science is the fascist notion of leftists that only some ideas can be mentioned out loud.
But please, continue your clueless presentation of your silly non-scientific notions as it helps the confused to clearly identify you as an anti-science loon.
Think, I said you’re free to challenge Newton’s laws or climate science. I never implied that certain things must not be said.
But please, continue with this facade that you’re such a smart and educated person- who can’t wrap their head around the 4th grade concept of personification. You know the Bearenstein bears wasn’t trying to convince you that bears can talk, right?
SD ... you’re the one who said ...
“Calling for idiots who want to give their uninformed opinions to be silenced is productive on the whole.”
Yep, you’re an anti-science fascist.
Actually, I mentioned Newton’s laws in my post above, not in this discussion.
I’ve never seen a group of adults get triggered over the weather until I met liberals. Then in the same breath they talk about feelings. “Eek it’s raining out! Eek it’s cold, no it’s hot...blame Russia!”
Thank you Think for being scientific about this. Maybe when Sd grows up, he too can view the world more maturely.
Calling for idiots who want to give their uninformed opinions to be silenced IS productive on the whole. I don’t need your uneducated ass talking over the doctor giving my prognosis.
Actually, I like making you idiotic science deniers keep talking. I’m fairly confident any objective reader who finds this thread will see the idiocy of your comments.
SD ... distract if you must. I have no problem with Sir Newton’s work. Unlike modern leftists who squeeze scientists out of organizations like NASA and replace them with political hacks who now even admit to manipulating the temperature data to support their faulty computer models.
I’d welcome Sir Newton’s empirical approach to climate science! Unfortunately, he’d be cast out by folks like you as a heretic for speaking the truth that doesn’t support your models.
...says the guy who’s freaking out over seasons 😂
You know I wasn’t actually expecting you to make an argument against Newton’s laws right? Jeez 😂
sd, you need to learn what the scientific method is. What would you use as a control to determine if the sun was actually causing global warming and cooling? I have an answer, you need to use your brain.
xxx, although I concur with your comment that sd was butt hurt when Trump won, the official win didn't occur until November 09th! LOL
SD ... it’s worth noting that you demand others’ scientific credentials, but somehow exclude yourself. Is it because you have no scientific training?
I’m not here to prove my qualifications, only to make you seem like babbling idiots who don’t trust 99% of the world’s scientists. What qualifies someone to shut the hell up and defer to experts?
But I’m a mechanical engineering student, and as I pointed out, the first chapter of literally every science textbook outlines how the scientific method is based on facts, not opinions.
SD ... ha ha ... thanks for confirming that you have no credentials, that you’re simply babbling about things for which you have no clue!
Who could’ve guessed that yet another non-scientist leftist would attempt to talk about science as if they had a clue.
It’s ok, you do provide a valued service. You illiteracy on science and your fascist views help others to see how devoid of value the left has become.
SD ... which haven of leftist liberal arts are you attending?
Ok, Think, I cant wait to read your exposé on how NOAA is fudging day. Are you going to finish that right after you publish your paper on how NASA faked the moon landings? Get real.
We aren’t even having a scientific debate here, you are just talking out of your ass saying that the vast majority of scientists in the world are committing a fraud. And I’m telling you that no one cares unless you’re an expert. Which you’re not. So leave it to the experts.
SD ... you’re really quite predictable. You see, I never said NOAA. I said NASA. So you clearly went off to your leftist search engine and did a quick search on a subject for which you were totally clueless ... that’s because you live in a leftist bubble.
You surely think you’ve got me in your little leftist fact checking cross hairs. Well, I’m sorry to disappoint you with the facts, but you’re wrong. And your leftist fact checkers are non-scientists posing (like you) as experts.
Here, start with this. And pay special attention when it says that “... climate scientists often apply adjustments to surface temperature thermometers ...”
Do you think Sir Issac Newton felt the need to put his finger on the scale of the gravity scale to “adjust” for the facts to fit his computer models?
SD ... noted, you’re embarrassed at the liberal arts institution that you are attending. I genuinely wish you the best in spite of your embarrassment.
SD ... I believe that we landed on the moon. I also believe that even though LBJ was a corrupt Democrat and a member of the KKK that he still didn’t have the philandering Mr Kennedy killed. Likewise, even though MrO, a non-scientist pushed for us to sign the rotten Paris accord, I agree with the climate realists that it was a pathetic waste of American money, and would have had no impact on the worlds worst polluters.
Think, we’ve been down the NOAA rabbit hole before, sorry if you have some memory problems. At least you found an article from this year this time. You seem to be having trouble with some elementary school concepts as well, so hopefully you are doing ok. Your one article is from Tucker Carlson’s website. Trump pays Carlson, so I’m not sure why you think that’s a good source to use.
SD ... how many video clips of MrO saying that the science is settled do you require before you’ll admit that you are wrong?
SD ... keep shifting from NASA to NOAA in hopes that nobody will notice so that you can use your leftist fact check sites. Whatever you do, don’t admit what everyone else knows.
Think, make a gif for me please
SD ... please listen carefully, and the please, oh please, come back and tell us that MrO isn’t a politician or that MrO didn’t say that the science is settled.
I can’t hardly contain myself waiting on your “insightful” reply ...
That's a great point. They seem to ignore the basic scientific idea that knowledge is continually undergoing modification.
Absolutely! More close-mindedness from the folks who accuse US of being close-minded!
They’re also the same ones that deny that DNA proves that a baby is a human being at conception, separate from it’s mother’s body!
TL, i hate to be a grammar NAZI, but did auto correct steal your "d"?
I'll buy 2 for $1,000 and solve the puzzle. "closed-minded."
No applause, only money.
I mean, yours would also work in that the AGW movement occurs among like minded morons. 😜
I’ve really never seen anyone use “closed-minded,” though it’s logically more accurate. But it’s synonymous with what everyone means by “close-minded,” as long as they’re pronouncing it “klōz” and not “klōs.”
Great sleuthing, though!
⚜ ᎢᎻᎬ ᏩᎡᎪᎷᎷᎪᎡ ᏢᎾᏞᏆᏟᎬ ⚜
Really, Tom? I’ve always thought it was CLOSED minded. His mind is closed off, after all, right? I can’t get either close minded, close-minded, closed minded, or closed-minded to pull up in my online dictionary, though. Can you please explain?
Close, to me, means nearby.
Closed means not open to other ideas.
I'm with 4JC on this one.