Originally posted by DA Morgan:
dehammer wrote:
"This is the problem with global warming alarmist."
How about the problem with those that are not alarmed? Their inability to point to a single scientific study that supports their delusion?
we dont have to point to a study that supports out "delusion" all we have to do is point out the flaws in the studies that alarmist use as their bible.
you talk about how the peer review system works so well, but just look at what happen when one paper decided to publish an article pointing out the flaws in an accepted study.
three editors quit because the chief editor dared to publish something that questioned global warming. not the evidence, the fact that it was published against their demands that it be censored. several major science magazines immeadiately attacked that paper, not on merit of the article, but one the fact that they dared to publish something from someone who has a cousin that works as a gas pump operator. Several major scientist argued that their data could not be used in such a way, even though it had been used by others to show that global warming was a fact.
not a single person argued that the facts were not there, they argued that the paper could not publish it. even to the point of trying to get the paper shut down.
that is censorship and its all across the board. getting an article published that disproves global warming is like trying to get the vatican to publish a book on witchcraft spells.
on the other hand, the few actual times that someone has come up with actual data, the flaws were pointed out, just to be ignored as not relavant.
