Apparently, the academics, scientific community, and Global Warming experts are either very, very smart, incredibly naive or totally disingenuous.
Which is it I dare to ask? You see, we've always been told to question authority, as per Einstein, but now when we do the Global Warming Alarmists with their AGW Theory tell us we are "climate deniers" and uninformed skeptics, calling us conspiracy theorists.
That's just amazing, as all we are doing is asking them to back up their data, and we are challenging them on all points of their data - their answers are troubling to the point that they cannot or will not engage our questions any longer - I dare to ask; WHY? Not long ago, someone was debating me on AGW Theory, and they said to me that it was up to me to prove the AGW scientific community wrong and that it was important for me to debate them on their terms? That's impossible for several reasons, one I am not a scientist, but secondly, it's not for me to prove them wrong, it's for them to prove themselves right, and thus, until that time, and certainly they've had long enough now and spent enough billions of dollars in research to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt - I suspect they can't.
Which makes sense because, now we see they are manipulating their data, which is exactly the problem with run-away science, and I suspect the AGW crowd has hijacked science.
My acquaintance told me that I had to prove that Global Warming was a fraudulent theory, but in doing so it was obvious what was happening, he was using a boomerang technique, used in 7th grade debate class, it will not work with me.
You see, I ask that the scientists and science "PROVE" their theory, they won't or can't.
Thus, I will not engage in that argument that; "I can't prove they are wrong, so they must be right" - it's not up to me to "prove anything" and often creationists use that ploy, much to the laughter of Richard Dawkins and such.
It's irrelevant, for someone to hold up a mirror and claim I am wrong, when I never claimed to be correct about anything, I have nothing to prove, I am not engaging in an argument of bad science, I won't do that.
I cannot be made to believe something based on someone's "authority" - they must prove their facts without false or manipulated data, otherwise it is a bogus argument, for they have dismissed their own credibility in the process.
Why you ask, it's simple; I have nothing to prove, human science does, so I await their return of the ball across that net, if they take that ball to the announcer's stand and get on a mega-phone claiming victory, is it really? NO, no it's not.
You see, I am absolutely calling out AGW Theory and challenging the data, facts, and everything put forth, since those who purport this theory stand upon pedestals and refuse to answer the questions, their information cannot be trusted.
Therefore their theory remains a; "Theory" not proven.
Making important political decisions for the future of our civilization and societies around the globe based on unproven theories, is merely a repeat of human history and human folly.
It's just like arguing with a Christian about their God, they keep running back to the bible as their proof, but you have to authenticate that proof first, before using that debate point, otherwise it's just a leap of faith, and there is no proof for it.
AGW theory is a nice try at a new religion, to get human societies to join in a common cause globally, unfortunately it's a lie.
That's the unfortunate reality.
My question is who on Earth sits in a room and makes these bogus concepts up anyway? Oh well, I guess L.
Ron Hubbard created a new religion too, so I guess it's just amazing what humans can be led to believe through repetition, education, and indoctrination, but quite frankly, I am still waiting for the proof.
Please consider all this and think on it.
If you have any comments or questions, shoot me an email.
Which is it I dare to ask? You see, we've always been told to question authority, as per Einstein, but now when we do the Global Warming Alarmists with their AGW Theory tell us we are "climate deniers" and uninformed skeptics, calling us conspiracy theorists.
That's just amazing, as all we are doing is asking them to back up their data, and we are challenging them on all points of their data - their answers are troubling to the point that they cannot or will not engage our questions any longer - I dare to ask; WHY? Not long ago, someone was debating me on AGW Theory, and they said to me that it was up to me to prove the AGW scientific community wrong and that it was important for me to debate them on their terms? That's impossible for several reasons, one I am not a scientist, but secondly, it's not for me to prove them wrong, it's for them to prove themselves right, and thus, until that time, and certainly they've had long enough now and spent enough billions of dollars in research to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt - I suspect they can't.
Which makes sense because, now we see they are manipulating their data, which is exactly the problem with run-away science, and I suspect the AGW crowd has hijacked science.
My acquaintance told me that I had to prove that Global Warming was a fraudulent theory, but in doing so it was obvious what was happening, he was using a boomerang technique, used in 7th grade debate class, it will not work with me.
You see, I ask that the scientists and science "PROVE" their theory, they won't or can't.
Thus, I will not engage in that argument that; "I can't prove they are wrong, so they must be right" - it's not up to me to "prove anything" and often creationists use that ploy, much to the laughter of Richard Dawkins and such.
It's irrelevant, for someone to hold up a mirror and claim I am wrong, when I never claimed to be correct about anything, I have nothing to prove, I am not engaging in an argument of bad science, I won't do that.
I cannot be made to believe something based on someone's "authority" - they must prove their facts without false or manipulated data, otherwise it is a bogus argument, for they have dismissed their own credibility in the process.
Why you ask, it's simple; I have nothing to prove, human science does, so I await their return of the ball across that net, if they take that ball to the announcer's stand and get on a mega-phone claiming victory, is it really? NO, no it's not.
You see, I am absolutely calling out AGW Theory and challenging the data, facts, and everything put forth, since those who purport this theory stand upon pedestals and refuse to answer the questions, their information cannot be trusted.
Therefore their theory remains a; "Theory" not proven.
Making important political decisions for the future of our civilization and societies around the globe based on unproven theories, is merely a repeat of human history and human folly.
It's just like arguing with a Christian about their God, they keep running back to the bible as their proof, but you have to authenticate that proof first, before using that debate point, otherwise it's just a leap of faith, and there is no proof for it.
AGW theory is a nice try at a new religion, to get human societies to join in a common cause globally, unfortunately it's a lie.
That's the unfortunate reality.
My question is who on Earth sits in a room and makes these bogus concepts up anyway? Oh well, I guess L.
Ron Hubbard created a new religion too, so I guess it's just amazing what humans can be led to believe through repetition, education, and indoctrination, but quite frankly, I am still waiting for the proof.
Please consider all this and think on it.
If you have any comments or questions, shoot me an email.
SHARE
