[–] [deleted] 1 points 15 points (+16|-1) ago 


[–] [deleted] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)


[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)


[–] ethtirlomalral 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Many studies are politically motivated but I wouldn’t say it’s anywhere close to 99%. It doesn’t even break 50%.

Lack of Reproducibility is the biggest problem.

[–] NoRoyalty [S] 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

I'd be interested in seeing that study.

[–] MaunaLoona 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

There's a slew of right wing clickbait sites these days. Don't get baited.

[–] shrink 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

What hurts my soul isn't that these aggravating, lowest-common-denominator pandering sites and articles exist, it's that they wouldn't unless they really pulled in the numbers. There is strength in numbers, certainly, but when I think about the capacities of those who are "on our side" or whatever, well...it's not heartening.

[–] Mylon 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It's almost as if the MSM abusing their reputation to push fake news has created a vacuum.

[–] NoRoyalty [S] 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago 

There's a slew of left wingnuts very worried the cat is out of the bag.

[–] Drowpic 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

You sound so qualified. What academic degree do you hold exactly? PhD in burger flipping?

[–] ItsBad 8 points 5 points (+13|-8) ago 

The reason why advancement of technology has stopped, is that the Standard Model of Physics is a hoax. All these scientists are finding and searching for such strange things - quantum physics, higgs boson, dark matter, dark energy. They're adding duct tape to a system that doesn't work. They invented these hacks to deal with things like the accelerating expanding universe, but still can't explain it fully. The things they're talking about have never been observed - they're just math to patch things up, so they can claim anything. The media then latches onto the not quite explanation, and so the scientific consensus becomes such that unproven claims are taken at face value. Nobody questions, nobody wants to be seen as a fool. The few that do are decried as conspiracy theorists, pseudo scientists, hucksters, mentally ill.

“We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

Einstein is JEWISH physics. We were warned.

[–] Saufsoldat 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

advancement of technology has stopped

This is what retards actually believe.

[–] ItsBad 4 points 2 points (+6|-4) ago 

I was exaggerating, but compared to the explosive rates of change we've had in the past... yeah. We're advancing already existing technology alright, but there are no new big discoveries. At least not revealed ones. Instead they're hyping up this quantum kike computer nonsense that has never been proven to do anything, and can't explain what it does.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)


[–] tehpatriarchy 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

smoking. It's a legit cognitive enhancer.

If nicotine were discovered today for the first time it would be a bona fide wonder drug.

[–] fellowwhiteperson 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Einstein was right. Relativity is real and confirmed. The next step is to recalculate fields using non-Euclidean space. Black holes do not exist because the "event horizon" has 0 surface area and 0 volume, therefore nothing is inside of it. Space-time distorts to prevent matter from reaching that critical density, much like how nothing can exceed the speed of light. The electro-weak relationship can be explained in the same fashion.

[–] Fagtardicus 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 


[–] IDintDoNuthin 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Political Science

[–] whisky_cat 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I laughed. Which is sad, because its true. Queue up Metallica i guess.

[–] goatboy 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

...Including this one...

Seriously, 99%? The rare time a scientific paper should site 99% of something, it had better be talking about recrystalization or else my bullshit-o-meter will go off.

[–] SuperConductiveRabbi 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Why would I trust the scientific paper proving this?

[–] shrink 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Just a semantic nitpick here, but if it actually proved it, as in the scientific meaning of the word, then trust doesn't factor into it whatsoever.

[–] SuperConductiveRabbi 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

How about, if it purported to prove it?

[–] NoRoyalty [S] 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

Why wouldn't you?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 


[–] alphasnail 3 points 2 points (+5|-3) ago 

Global warming, for example.

They base their claims on increasingly rising global temperatures averages do to man made carbon emissions.

They are unable to replicate this claim in a laboratory setting using the scientific method. Thry cannot reference ancient events for proof as man made carbon emissions are a relatively new thing.

On top of that, they use historical climatalogical and meteorological data to supplement their claims even though recorded weather data only covers less than 200 years out of the billions of years Earth has existed.

They popularly say "oh, but paleoclimatology studies of air bubbles trapped in ancient glaciers show that the Earth's atmosphere had more carbon dioxide with higher average temperatures." The only response to that is that it was not caused by industrialism and motorists, but something else. Hence why they cant reproduce their claims using the scientific method.

It is also worth noting that all of the big names who advocate global warming are government controlled agencies: NASA, NOAA, and the NWS. Coincidence?

[–] UsedToBeCujoQuarrel 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

The models they have don't work. And you can't prove anything with a model.

Your model will show what you believe because of your inherit bias when you set up the data.

[–] ItsBad 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

Exactly. Space weather is ignored by academia because it explains things while global warming is smoke and mirrors. There's also the possibility of geo-engineering and even weather modification.

[–] xberb 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It makes sense though, the Earth is a closed system - for the most part (we lose some stuff to solar winds, but gravity holds most of it here)

If we keep pumping carbons from the ground into the air.. it will have an effect on the environment. Physics doesn't care about humans or any life. It will just do what it does... if we ramp up the CO2 and Methane in the atmosphere thanks to coal, industry, cow farms, etc... what will happen?

We don't know for sure... but we have very smart people who think about it all the time

For my money, places like Venus are a good place to look as a model of what that can do if left unchecked

[–] alphasnail 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Carbon emissions create what is referred to as the greenhouse effect whereby terrestrial heat becomes trapped in the atmosphere rather than radiating back out into space. There's no denying that.

The thing is that we use what is called the scientific method to support claims. That's what scientists are supposed to do. Instead they pass conjecture off as facts.

Given that the Eartg has undergone various warming periods due to a variety of reasons, carbon dioxide being one, they cannot say definitively that that average temperature growth is from man made carbon emissions if they are unable to reproduce their claims.

They would need a lab the size of Earth with the same identical characteristics as what we live in now. They dont have one of those. No one does except for the real Earth we are currently using and doesn't suffice for a controlled experiment at this point.

Sound like too much work? It is.

YouTube bans or removes comments of users who post anti-global warming material. Google censors it and so does Facebook. All the while the agencies responsible for these global warming claims are government sockpuppet agencies.

load more comments ▼ (14 remaining)