So now science fiction writers are climate scientists in jerm's psychotic mind. Amazing. So Jem...it must really bug you that not a single respected climatologist denies man made global warming. It makes your position seem really really stupid. Worthy of ridicule in fact.
Yeah, here we go. A guy that uses an ex cartoonist and a politician as reputable science sources calls out someone for not using reputable science sources. It just never ends in this hoax.
Man's reasoning isn't worth a pot to piss in. You want proof? Tell me what the anti God for reason crowd says Bruce Jenner is. A man or a woman. You think I want people who don't know a man from a woman telling me how to run my life?
Jules Verne had some interesting things to say about climate science. Maybe we ought to use his work as a reference.
__Most__ "Man's reasoning isn't worth a pot to piss in", if by that you mean the man on the street. But I disagree that people that spend their lives studying Philosophy, Law, Mathematics, Science, etc, that their reasoning is not flawed. In theory, we study with the wise, and elect the upright. People that have shown a lifelong dedication to truth. Perhaps you mean morally flawed. Well, that is the argument that I have seen people use when they say something along the lines of, "If we have no God, then won't everything be allowed?" [e.g., "Call me Kaitlin"] I say, where did your God-Given morals come from? From a book written by flawed men, hallucinating they received the MORALS of God. I think that is a very reasonable thing to say to ask where morals come from if not from God. I think the answer is that Law and Morals as conceived by learned men and women try to intersect, but how this is done is very difficult and often imperfect. I also believe that Religion does play a useful role in helping us find universal law and in the limit morals. I just think that the few religious people that try to do good with religion are far far outnumbered by those that try do harm by it. Or, perhaps a few spoil it for the many.
that is one funny troll. didn't you read the link I gave you regarding the fact Catholics only have to listen to the Pope when he speakes ex cathedra. did you understand that. You realize as a believer in Jesus you would be be concerned about God's laws not man's. And we got instructions on this subject to be good stewards... not moronic big govt loving drones.
Sorry, I don't know what ex-cathedra means. In science, we can't decide when to listen to a scientist or not by some random ex-whatever. The paper speaks for itself and a line of argument is either backed by data and logic or it isn't. A single counter-argument, by anybody is enough to disprove a theory.
Popes are part of a phony priesthood put in place by the devil to oppress people. They aren't spiritual necessarily, they could be I guess, but for the most part they are power mongering politicians. This one is aligning with the UN's view on GW. The Pope would love to bring everything, the UN included, under the mantle of the Catholic Church so he's going to go along to get along with the Common Wisdom.
the message is science is about reproducible results. but his background is stronger than many "climatologists" he obtained his bachelor's degree in biological anthropology summa cum laude in 1964 He graduated from Harvard, obtaining an M.D. in 1969,[21] and undertook a post-doctoral fellowship study at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, from 1969 to 1970.[citation needed]
wow now you are a clown... as that is what I have been telling you about your recent love of consensus science. you have not produced any evidence that man made co2 is causing warming, yet alone a peer reviewed paper and neither has the pope. so unless the pope were to speak ex cathedra on the issue not a soul need listen to him. Catholic or not.