Oh goodness

Post Reply New Topic

Good thing i have a pretty good immune system. <.< Haven't been quite sick recently or had any major infection. I doubt i should be needing that flu shot. ;p

That and, i don't get out much often, so even IF i contract it, stupid virus will die with me. <.<

Well, you know, astrology is not equal to astronomy, and discarding astrology doesn't make you close-minded. It's in fact the pseudo-scientific alternatives that typically produce more closed minds. I dare you, try to tell a climate-change denier that they're wrong - It will not matter if you deconstruct their arguments one by one - They will now acknowledge it that they're wrong, but rather just move on to Point B. Demolish point B, and they'll return to point A.

The media should never cover alternate viewpoints within science in my opinion. The last time they did, their reporting of the MMR scare caused a drop in herd immunity in the U.K, and as I said - Measles, Mumps, and Rubella, which had been extinct, once again surfaced. So the media should NOT give attention to fringe science, because it's dangerous. This is how fringe science actually works - You will never make it past peer review, so instead you inject your ideas into the media and politics. This is actually described in the Wedge Document from the Discovery Institute, the hub of the "Intelligent Design" movement. You can read it here: http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf

The Earth's climate is constantly changing. Sometimes it is hotter. Sometimes it is cooler. Prior to the Younger Dryas and the Little Ice Age the climate in the Northern hemispher was warmer than it is now. Greenland used to be .... green.

The real question is how much of the recent heating trend (which started in the 19th century following the so-called Little Ice Age) is due to human activity and how much is due to perodic natural causes, such as cosmic ray input, variations in the earth's orbit, earth wobble on its axis, variations in solar energy output, etc. etc..

At this moment there is really no climate science. There are several climate models but they are very dependent on partial data and have no solid scientific basis. Eventually climate will have a better scientific foundation, much the way geology finally found its bedrock (pardon the pun!) in the tectonic plate theory, proposed in the early 20th century and disbelieved until around 1960 when data was collected to support it. Climate is not easy to theorize since it is based on a system that runs by chaotic dynamics.

ruveyn