This document only cites 6 references, 4 of which are the authors’ own, and of these 2 are not actually published. Therefore I would not regard this document as having any scientific credibility. — From rebuttal paper Bano posted
Because climatologists make no claim that is so categorical and clear that their whole theory rests upon it, they can endlessly pile excuse upon excuse with their central claim remaining untouched. This is not science. — Neri
Warmed-over denialist garbage cribbed from notorious purveyors of science disinformation. Nothing to see here. — SophistiCat
know as much about climatology as I know about epidemiology. So, I do what I always do and roll with the experts, the vast majority of which (as I understand) think you are wrong. But let's say, just for the sake of argument, that you are right. That still doesn't address the fact that pumping countless metric shit-tons of man-made poison into the air is not a good thing. You know, like doing the same to a river. And no, Earth doesn't run around cleaning up our mess in any realistic time frame that will protect existing biodiversity baselines. — James Riley
You are a closed-minded fool who believes that anyone who disagrees with you deserves to be dead. — Neri
I will not wish the same for you, even though you do not agree with the freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment--the most basic of all human rights. — Neri
This is beyond stupid. It is as sensible as saying it's all Neri's fault. It's you or cloud formation, Neri; which do you say it is?These scientists argue that cloud formation is the principle engine of climate change. — Neri
TClark,
In the portion of my work that you cite, I make the Popper argument. Karl Popper rejected the notion of consensus in matters of science, insisting that a scientific postulate can only be based upon experimentation and is formulated with such particularity that it is subject to falsification. Like psychology, he would rank climatology as pseudoscience. — Neri
Is Climatology Science? — Neri
All that's available are a few, barely discernible clues left behind in ice, tree rings, etc. a — TheMadFool
I studied those clues and found them strong and consistent, not 'barely discernible' at all. The scientific case for anthropic climate change is extremely strong, and by now as close to absolute certainty as it will ever get. — Olivier5
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.