Most legitimate scientific organization that disagrees with man made climate change
-
So, a lot of posts about political crap, but no orgs yet.
But it's the climatologists that are in it for the money... Right....
So, a lot of posts about political crap, but no orgs yet.
But it's the climatologists that are in it for the money... Right....
Has any of those climatologists predictions come true...the Earth should have ended four or five times already.
Why does the climate Czar John Kerry fly in private jets which cause a great deal of pollution?
-
So, a lot of posts about political crap, but no orgs yet.
But it's the climatologists that are in it for the money... Right....
Has any of those climatologists predictions come true...the Earth should have ended four or five times already.
Why does the climate Czar John Kerry fly in private jets which cause a great deal of pollution?
Has any of those climatologists predictions come true...the Earth should have ended four or five times already.
Why does the climate Czar John Kerry fly in private jets which cause a great deal of pollution?
Nope not a 1... But they'll keep pushing the fear...
-
Curious... for all the climate deniers here... what is the most legitimate scientific organization that agrees with you? Seriously. Name one.
Where, on the other side... https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/10/more-999-studies-agree-humans-caused-climate-change
More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change
Curious... for all the climate deniers here... what is the most legitimate scientific organization that agrees with you? Seriously. Name one.
Where, on the other side... https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/10/more-999-studies-agree-humans-caused-climate-change
More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change
So?
Why is this important to you? Or to anyone?
-
I bet 99% of scientists also agreed that the universe started with the Big Bang. Now the big bang is under debate in the scientific world because of the discoveries the James Webb telescope made in finding bodies that shouldn't exist.
I know I know, the Big Bang was only a theory, but still.
-
I bet 99% of scientists also agreed that the universe started with the Big Bang. Now the big bang is under debate in the scientific world because of the discoveries the James Webb telescope made in finding bodies that shouldn't exist.
I know I know, the Big Bang was only a theory, but still.
I bet 99% of scientists also agreed that the universe started with the Big Bang. Now the big bang is under debate in the scientific world because of the discoveries the James Webb telescope made in finding bodies that shouldn't exist.
I know I know, the Big Bang was only a theory, but still.
It was a sound theory until proven otherwise (Still up for debate).. I've never bought into it completely.. But I do believe it is part of the ignition system if you will.. But were gonna find out in the end I think Sound and light have a lot more to do with this than some inertial event
-
I bet 99% of scientists also agreed that the universe started with the Big Bang. Now the big bang is under debate in the scientific world because of the discoveries the James Webb telescope made in finding bodies that shouldn't exist.
I know I know, the Big Bang was only a theory, but still.
I bet 99% of scientists also agreed that the universe started with the Big Bang. Now the big bang is under debate in the scientific world because of the discoveries the James Webb telescope made in finding bodies that shouldn't exist.
I know I know, the Big Bang was only a theory, but still.
Any time anytime vaguely scientific comes out of the mouths of right wing posters on here I don't believe you've ever been correct...
https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-science-denial
Kirkpatrick went back to her research and forgot about her quote. That was, until mid-August, when she received a text from a friend saying that there was an article — originally published by an organization called the Institute of Art and Ideas but now being republished on mainstream news sites — saying that JWST's observations of distant galaxies had disproved the Big Bang, which is not correct.
Worse still, the article had taken what Kirkpatrick had told Nature and misused it out of context to give the false impression that astrophysicists were panicking over the thought of the Big Bang theory being wrong.
The author of the article, an independent researcher named Eric Lerner, has been a serial denier of the Big Bang since the late 1980s, preferring his personal pseudoscientific alternative.
Scientists welcome new evidence. Theory is evolving and zeroing in on an answer. But a scientific theory has a lot of rigor behind it than what Joe blow thinks when he hears the word theory.
posters on here seem to have their own beliefs, shun any and all legitimate evidence that disagrees, and blindly believe any illegitimate source that says what they want to hear. Super similar to very religious folks and their beliefs, no surprise. Starting with an outcome and working backwards to cherry pick evidence
-
In the meantime, astronomers continue to learn more about the early universe with the fantastic data coming down from JWST.
The irony is that JWST's observations are actually supporting the Big Bang model, showing that the first galaxies were smaller and grew larger over time, just as Big Bang cosmology predicts. The surprising finding that galaxies in the early universe are more plentiful, and a little more massive and structured than expected, doesn't mean that the Big Bang is wrong. It just means that some of the cosmology that follows the Big Bang requires a little bit of tweaking.
And that's the fun of science. Despite the arguments from Lerner and other science deniers, science is never clean-cut; we're always learning, always improving our theories, and there is no shadowy conspiracy trying to stamp out independent thought. More than anything, science is based on observation and evidence, which the Big Bang has in bucketloads.
That's not to say people shouldn't be allowed to question things, but intelligent questioning is done in a framework of open-mindedness without pre-conceived ideologies, where beliefs are forged by evidence, rather than the other way around. That's exactly how the Big Bang theory was conceived nearly a century ago: by following the (then surprising) evidence that the universe is expanding, working out what this might logically mean, and then testing it on predictions such as the existence of the CMB radiation.
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
In the meantime, astronomers continue to learn more about the early universe with the fantastic data coming down from JWST.
The irony is that JWST's observations are actually supporting the Big Bang model, showing that the first galaxies were smaller and grew larger over time, just as Big Bang cosmology predicts. The surprising finding that galaxies in the early universe are more plentiful, and a little more massive and structured than expected, doesn't mean that the Big Bang is wrong. It just means that some of the cosmology that follows the Big Bang requires a little bit of tweaking.
And that's the fun of science. Despite the arguments from Lerner and other science deniers, science is never clean-cut; we're always learning, always improving our theories, and there is no shadowy conspiracy trying to stamp out independent thought. More than anything, science is based on observation and evidence, which the Big Bang has in bucketloads.
That's not to say people shouldn't be allowed to question things, but intelligent questioning is done in a framework of open-mindedness without pre-conceived ideologies, where beliefs are forged by evidence, rather than the other way around. That's exactly how the Big Bang theory was conceived nearly a century ago: by following the (then surprising) evidence that the universe is expanding, working out what this might logically mean, and then testing it on predictions such as the existence of the CMB radiation.
In the meantime, astronomers continue to learn more about the early universe with the fantastic data coming down from JWST.
The irony is that JWST's observations are actually supporting the Big Bang model, showing that the first galaxies were smaller and grew larger over time, just as Big Bang cosmology predicts. The surprising finding that galaxies in the early universe are more plentiful, and a little more massive and structured than expected, doesn't mean that the Big Bang is wrong. It just means that some of the cosmology that follows the Big Bang requires a little bit of tweaking.
And that's the fun of science. Despite the arguments from Lerner and other science deniers, science is never clean-cut; we're always learning, always improving our theories, and there is no shadowy conspiracy trying to stamp out independent thought. More than anything, science is based on observation and evidence, which the Big Bang has in bucketloads.
That's not to say people shouldn't be allowed to question things, but intelligent questioning is done in a framework of open-mindedness without pre-conceived ideologies, where beliefs are forged by evidence, rather than the other way around. That's exactly how the Big Bang theory was conceived nearly a century ago: by following the (then surprising) evidence that the universe is expanding, working out what this might logically mean, and then testing it on predictions such as the existence of the CMB radiation.
It was basically the work of Edwin Hubble who deduced after careful observation the universe was expanding. Without his outstanding studies we would not be where we are today.. I don't think the BBT is entirely wrong.. But I don't think its the final answer either... I think of it more as a component to what/however it all started... I think in the end sonic frequencies will have a lot to do with this.. I know it sounds weird.. But so is the Universe itself...
Nickers...."There are no old running QB's in the NFL "~Sam Rutigliano~ -
I bet 99% of scientists also agreed that the universe started with the Big Bang. Now the big bang is under debate in the scientific world because of the discoveries the James Webb telescope made in finding bodies that shouldn't exist.
I know I know, the Big Bang was only a theory, but still.
Any time anytime vaguely scientific comes out of the mouths of right wing posters on here I don't believe you've ever been correct...
https://www.space.com/james-webb-space-telescope-science-denial
Kirkpatrick went back to her research and forgot about her quote. That was, until mid-August, when she received a text from a friend saying that there was an article — originally published by an organization called the Institute of Art and Ideas but now being republished on mainstream news sites — saying that JWST's observations of distant galaxies had disproved the Big Bang, which is not correct.
Worse still, the article had taken what Kirkpatrick had told Nature and misused it out of context to give the false impression that astrophysicists were panicking over the thought of the Big Bang theory being wrong.
The author of the article, an independent researcher named Eric Lerner, has been a serial denier of the Big Bang since the late 1980s, preferring his personal pseudoscientific alternative.
Scientists welcome new evidence. Theory is evolving and zeroing in on an answer. But a scientific theory has a lot of rigor behind it than what Joe blow thinks when he hears the word theory.
posters on here seem to have their own beliefs, shun any and all legitimate evidence that disagrees, and blindly believe any illegitimate source that says what they want to hear. Super similar to very religious folks and their beliefs, no surprise. Starting with an outcome and working backwards to cherry pick evidence
Any time anytime vaguely scientific comes out of the mouths of right wing posters on here I don't believe you've ever been correct...
I did a little digging, and you are right, but it's not a matter of denial on my part. I have no issues with the Big Bang Theory.
After The Webb telescope findings, we were inundated with internet stories and YOUTUBE "The Big Bang Debunked" "videos... and how "we must re-think how the universe began"....and that's sorta where I left off...never going back later to follow up on the subject so I took it for granted.
I just watched one of my favorites Neil Degrasse Tyson who in a nutshell said that the Webb didn't debunk the BBT.
Brian Cox is fascinating to listen to. Michio Kaku is another one of my favorites.
-
Any time anytime vaguely scientific comes out of the mouths of right wing posters on here I don't believe you've ever been correct...
I did a little digging, and you are right, but it's not a matter of denial on my part. I have no issues with the Big Bang Theory.
After The Webb telescope findings, we were inundated with internet stories and YOUTUBE "The Big Bang Debunked" "videos... and how "we must re-think how the universe began"....and that's sorta where I left off...never going back later to follow up on the subject so I took it for granted.
I just watched one of my favorites Neil Degrasse Tyson who in a nutshell said that the Webb didn't debunk the BBT.
Brian Cox is fascinating to listen to. Michio Kaku is another one of my favorites.
I did a little digging, and you are right, but it's not a matter of denial on my part. I have no issues with the Big Bang Theory.
After The Webb telescope findings, we were inundated with internet stories and YOUTUBE "The Big Bang Debunked" "videos... and how we must "we must re-think how the universe began"....and that's sorta where I left off...never going back later to follow up on the subject so I took it for granted.
I just watched one of my favorites Neil Degrasse Tyson who in a nutshell said that the Webb didn't debunk the BBT.
Brian Cox is fascinating to listen to. Michio Kaku is another one of my favorites.
I like NDT... But the celebrity thing with him annoys me a little... Michio Kaku I like because he expresses an open mind to things..
-
I did a little digging, and you are right, but it's not a matter of denial on my part. I have no issues with the Big Bang Theory.
After The Webb telescope findings, we were inundated with internet stories and YOUTUBE "The Big Bang Debunked" "videos... and how we must "we must re-think how the universe began"....and that's sorta where I left off...never going back later to follow up on the subject so I took it for granted.
I just watched one of my favorites Neil Degrasse Tyson who in a nutshell said that the Webb didn't debunk the BBT.
Brian Cox is fascinating to listen to. Michio Kaku is another one of my favorites.
I like NDT... But the celebrity thing with him annoys me a little... Michio Kaku I like because he expresses an open mind to things..
I like NDT... But the celebrity thing with him annoys me a little... Michio Kaku I like because he expresses an open mind to things..
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
-
I like NDT... But the celebrity thing with him annoys me a little... Michio Kaku I like because he expresses an open mind to things..
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
No hell I have lived with black people , so that's the furthest thing from my mind... It's all his Star talk shit that kind of irks me a bit... Brian Cox I vaguely know... The guy more on Woody's level would be Richard Dawkins.. This guy just shits on the existence of God and Creation with every fiber of his being... While some of his studies and concepts are interesting... I find him to be a certified nut job...
EDIT: the thing that bothers me with NDT more than anything is.. He act's more like a Rock Star Celeb than a man of science... Carl Sagan was perfect in every way... He didn't set out to be a media star.. Just was more like Leonard Bernstein... Bringing Science to the public rich or poor.. The way Bernstein gave the common man the opportunity to know and enjoy classical music Not just the wealthy..... Both Bernstein and Sagan are childhood heroes of mine...
-
In the meantime, astronomers continue to learn more about the early universe with the fantastic data coming down from JWST.
The irony is that JWST's observations are actually supporting the Big Bang model, showing that the first galaxies were smaller and grew larger over time, just as Big Bang cosmology predicts. The surprising finding that galaxies in the early universe are more plentiful, and a little more massive and structured than expected, doesn't mean that the Big Bang is wrong. It just means that some of the cosmology that follows the Big Bang requires a little bit of tweaking.
And that's the fun of science. Despite the arguments from Lerner and other science deniers, science is never clean-cut; we're always learning, always improving our theories, and there is no shadowy conspiracy trying to stamp out independent thought. More than anything, science is based on observation and evidence, which the Big Bang has in bucketloads.
That's not to say people shouldn't be allowed to question things, but intelligent questioning is done in a framework of open-mindedness without pre-conceived ideologies, where beliefs are forged by evidence, rather than the other way around. That's exactly how the Big Bang theory was conceived nearly a century ago: by following the (then surprising) evidence that the universe is expanding, working out what this might logically mean, and then testing it on predictions such as the existence of the CMB radiation.
It was basically the work of Edwin Hubble who deduced after careful observation the universe was expanding. Without his outstanding studies we would not be where we are today.. I don't think the BBT is entirely wrong.. But I don't think its the final answer either... I think of it more as a component to what/however it all started... I think in the end sonic frequencies will have a lot to do with this.. I know it sounds weird.. But so is the Universe itself...
It was basically the work of Edwin Hubble who deduced after careful observation the universe was expanding. Without his outstanding studies we would not be where we are today.. I don't think the BBT is entirely wrong.. But I don't think its the final answer either... I think of it more as a component to what/however it all started... I think in the end sonic frequencies will have a lot to do with this.. I know it sounds weird.. But so is the Universe itself...
Sure, science is ever evolving, learning, getting more accurate, etc. I don't disagree.
Just hate seeing words twisted by pseudo scientific to straight anti science nut jobs. Not saying that's you or necessarily anyone on here. And while this board highlights those folks on the right, they exist on the left too (example, Greenpeace and their anti nuclear power rhetoric, or hippue anti vaxxers)
-
Any time anytime vaguely scientific comes out of the mouths of right wing posters on here I don't believe you've ever been correct...
I did a little digging, and you are right, but it's not a matter of denial on my part. I have no issues with the Big Bang Theory.
After The Webb telescope findings, we were inundated with internet stories and YOUTUBE "The Big Bang Debunked" "videos... and how "we must re-think how the universe began"....and that's sorta where I left off...never going back later to follow up on the subject so I took it for granted.
I just watched one of my favorites Neil Degrasse Tyson who in a nutshell said that the Webb didn't debunk the BBT.
Brian Cox is fascinating to listen to. Michio Kaku is another one of my favorites.
I did a little digging, and you are right, but it's not a matter of denial on my part. I have no issues with the Big Bang Theory.
After The Webb telescope findings, we were inundated with internet stories and YOUTUBE "The Big Bang Debunked" "videos... and how "we must re-think how the universe began"....and that's sorta where I left off...never going back later to follow up on the subject so I took it for granted.
I just watched one of my favorites Neil Degrasse Tyson who in a nutshell said that the Webb didn't debunk the BBT.
Brian Cox is fascinating to listen to. Michio Kaku is another one of my favorites.
Well I appreciate your willingness to look back into something after your initial thoughts on it. All too often that doesn't happen on the Internet or on this board.
-
I like NDT... But the celebrity thing with him annoys me a little... Michio Kaku I like because he expresses an open mind to things..
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
I'm for anyone that makes science approachable and inspires the next generation of scientists. Celebrity or not.
Sagan. Nye. NDT. Whomever
Our nation's science illiteracy is concerning, and it rears its ugly head on many topics. I'm for anything that combats that.
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
Climate deniers?
Experts?
You can shape an issue how ever you want with numbers.
You have zero credibility until you stop denying the truth.
Smile God Loves even you.
-
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
I'm for anyone that makes science approachable and inspires the next generation of scientists. Celebrity or not.
Sagan. Nye. NDT. Whomever
Our nation's science illiteracy is concerning, and it rears its ugly head on many topics. I'm for anything that combats that.
I'm for anyone that makes science approachable and inspires the next generation of scientists. Celebrity or not.
Sagan. Nye. NDT. Whomever
Our nation's science illiteracy is concerning, and it rears its ugly head on many topics. I'm for anything that combats that.
If it were only limited to science. Our nations illiteracy across the board is concerning.
-
Yes me too! I could do without the joking around.
But tell the truth, because NDT is black is what most annoys you, right?. LOL Right Woody?
No one can accuse us of not being pro-diversity. We like listening to the black guy, the bi-sexual white guy, and the Asian. lol
Not sure if you've ever listened to Cox but he is more subdued than the other two, always smiling, but very captivating.
I'm for anyone that makes science approachable and inspires the next generation of scientists. Celebrity or not.
Sagan. Nye. NDT. Whomever
Our nation's science illiteracy is concerning, and it rears its ugly head on many topics. I'm for anything that combats that.
Sagan. Nye. NDT. Whomever
As much as I liked Carl Sagan, he was an astronomer and astrophysicist not a climatologist.
Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer, not a climatologist.
Neil deGrasse Tyson is an astrophysicist, not a climatologist.
Do you see anything wrong with associating these guys with climate?
Two things that will define you: Your determination when you have nothing. Your attitude when you have everything. - Mike McCartney -
Sagan. Nye. NDT. Whomever
As much as I liked Carl Sagan, he was an astronomer and astrophysicist not a climatologist.
Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer, not a climatologist.
Neil deGrasse Tyson is an astrophysicist, not a climatologist.
Do you see anything wrong with associating these guys with climate?
As much as I liked Carl Sagan, he was an astronomer and astrophysicist not a climatologist.
Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer, not a climatologist.
Neil deGrasse Tyson is Tyson is an astrophysicist, not a climatologist.
Do you see anything wrong with associating these guys with climate?
On top of that.. Bill Nye is a phony scientist... A complete fraud...
Nickers...."There are no old running QB's in the NFL "~Sam Rutigliano~
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login