Dr. Eugenie Scott on Evolution and Global Warming Denialism: How the Public is Misled
Top Comments
All Comments (103)
-
Well said.
-
@mphello Who cares, I'm working currently on exceeding that anyways. You aren't a scientists, just some kiss ass who has no understanding about life who gets paid to troll a channel. You haven't presented any evidence on your supposed conclusions, and you point me in Luke's direction because you are to inferior to understand the own stuff you spew. Get a life.
-
@Gtrplyr1 The fact that you judge a person's arguments based on their tone rather than the validity of their claims proves you and your lover RuPaul are a mentally inferior subhuman shithead who does not have a math PhD.
-
@mphello it's your tone that makes you not worth talking to. Yes it's ok for you to believe this and your entitled to your opinion, but the fact you bring up Ron Paul to try to categorize me as a crazy loon when I'm quite educated myself, just shows your lack of communication skills. you attack instead of explaining your point of view on the topic. Atleast Luke is capable of communicating.
-
@Gtrplyr1 And real scientists do not spread lies to schoolchildren and Congress the way the HI does.
And real professionals (unlike pussy coward cops and judges) would not insult defendants or convicts. Judges and cops lie about proof and evidence all the time, but I don't hear you complaining about that.
Every prisoner and convict has the same right to have their opinion heard as you do.
-
@Gtrplyr1 Name ONE, shithead. You can't.
-
@Gtrplyr1 In the longer term more advanced technologies are being developed, e.g. for the catalytic oxidation of water to generate hydrogen.
-
@Gtrplyr1 Solar, wind and wave energy are all alternatives, but effective to different extents in different places. Even nuclear is MUCH better than coal, oil, etc.
-
@LukeScientiae is there alternative energy that is currently being studied? if so what?
-
@Gtrplyr1 The absolute priority is to reduce CO2 emissions by moving away from fossil fuels. This means reorienting the economy, but that will create MANY jobs - which is a good thing.
If you're not willing to discuss the science, or learn how it's funded, or what the studies are or what the data means, then there's no point continuing this discussion. Climate science started over a hundred years ago (did you look up Arrhenius?) and has accumulated a huge body of evidence that unambiguously points towards the fact that humans are causing climate change. No amount of attacking Gore or Rockerfeller or the IPCC is going to change that.
LukeScientiae 3 months ago 6
And stop telling yourself and others that Gore is more important than he is. For you he's a political target and it has nothing to do with the data, which you've not read yourself and probably don't understand. Read/listen to Oreskes (book: Merchants of Doubt), go and read Climte Change Denial by Washington & Cook, confront the reality of the right-wing media lying about the science, and stop putting what you'd like to be a political reality ahead of what the science actually is.
LukeScientiae 3 months ago 5