So, after reading only "half" of "one or two" of the "hundreds upon hundreds of studies, who's [sic] findings support this conclusion" [ that global warming, now called 'climate change'] is real and is caused by human activity, and only "some of the half of the one or two" that you did read, did you grasp, while the rest of them "went over your head", and reading "articles by scientists", which are not studies themselves, you have come to the conclusion that global warming/climate change is a real and present danger to humanity.
With your scant review of the studies and only reading, basically, the "articles of scientists" who have already drawn their conclusions that global warming/climate change is real and dangerous, you have concluded that all the studies concerning global warming/climate change are, indeed, "scientific" ??? Your "attempt" to form your "own opinion on this" is inadequate. And, more-to-the-point, your attempt to disparage Sam's perspective, based on the fact that he hasn't "read the hundreds and hundreds of studies who's [sic] findings support this conclusion" seems to bring indictment upon yourself, as well. Your attempt to form "your own opinion" is barely, if at all, more credible than Sam's. And, even more condemning, you mention that you only read, or tried to read and understand, reports that SUPPORT your perspective, as well as articles summarizing support for your perspective, and not studies and articles which OPPOSE your point-of-view, indicates that you only want to support your malformed conclusion that global-warming/climate change is real. And, in the same way you asked Sam, how many studies have you attempted to understand and summary articles have you read that have shown global-warming/climate change to be false, especially when the conclusion is that the phenomenon is NOT "human-caused" ??? And, let's stick to your remarks, rather than try to change the subject to what I believe, especially since I have not revealed, in fact, what I actually believe. We can discuss my beliefs after handling your remarks. Rick On 6/6/2014 10:50 AM, GMoney wrote: > I have not, Rick. Never said I did. > > I have read the abstract on a half dozen or so of them, and read maybe half > of one or two of them....i was able to grasp some of it, others went a > little over my head. > > So to form my own opinion on this, i try to read articles by scientists > that attempt to explain the methods and results of the studies. I figure > that's the best a science-loving non-scientist like myself can get. > > What about you? > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Rick Faircloth <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> So, GMoney... >> >> To paraphrase you, when did you "read the hundreds upon hundreds of studies >> who's findings support this conclusion, and deem every one of the to be >> scientific and credible" ? >> >> Rick >> >> >> On 6/6/2014 10:33 AM, GMoney wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Science, logic, fact, common sense etc. >>>> >>>> BTW, I do not reject the possibility that humans can contribute to >>>> "climate disruption". >>>> What I reject is the so-called proof that it exists or it's mans >>>> doing. When someone presents actual science to back up that theory I >>>> will have a look. >>>> >>> You have read the hundreds upon hundreds of studies who's findings >> support >>> this conclusion, and have deemed every one of them "unscientific"??? >>> >>> That's impressive. >>> >>> >>> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:370738 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
