Melton...
Things I can't predict with any level of accuracy:
Wether or not a given particle of uranium will decay into lead and when. However I can predict, with near absolute certainty, when about half of a certain mass of uranium will decay into lead.
Wether or not the tar and formaldyhide from any given cigarette will cause damage to my lungs. However I can predict that if I smoke cigarettes for years and years my chances of getting cancer are astronomically higher.
In other words: sceince is hard. You do not understand it. The current evidence towards the global climate crisis is based on models that were developed thirty years ago. Models that have turned out to be disturbingly accurate in every prediction they made. In fact, models that turned out to (in some cases) be too conservative.
Once again, the people with actual degrees and brains believe this. The people who believe in manmade global climate change have satisfied the burden of proof. If you want to disprove it, feel free to do so. But you won't do it by throwing up reductionist rhetoric, strawman arguments, excluded middle fallacies or god of the margins bullshit.
At this point manmade global climate change is the accepted reality. The burden of proof is on you, and those who think like you, to disprove it.
---------------
Epsilon
Things I can't predict with any level of accuracy:
Wether or not a given particle of uranium will decay into lead and when. However I can predict, with near absolute certainty, when about half of a certain mass of uranium will decay into lead.
Wether or not the tar and formaldyhide from any given cigarette will cause damage to my lungs. However I can predict that if I smoke cigarettes for years and years my chances of getting cancer are astronomically higher.
In other words: sceince is hard. You do not understand it. The current evidence towards the global climate crisis is based on models that were developed thirty years ago. Models that have turned out to be disturbingly accurate in every prediction they made. In fact, models that turned out to (in some cases) be too conservative.
Once again, the people with actual degrees and brains believe this. The people who believe in manmade global climate change have satisfied the burden of proof. If you want to disprove it, feel free to do so. But you won't do it by throwing up reductionist rhetoric, strawman arguments, excluded middle fallacies or god of the margins bullshit.
At this point manmade global climate change is the accepted reality. The burden of proof is on you, and those who think like you, to disprove it.
---------------
Epsilon