Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
Let’s see if we can unpack your “argument” here.
|
I did not make an argument, I simply stated my opinion. I believe there is a difference between an expression of an opinion and an argument. We have been through this before, and I even tried to make note that what I wrote was simply my opinion. What I wrote was not a premise for an argument relative to global warming nor did I offer any support for my opinion. Your exercise below has no value.
Quote:
|
You’re saying that you don’t like the U.N., therefore global warming is a massive, worldwide scientific hoax perpetrated by 100 countries, a dozen scientific academies, all scientific funding agencies, hundreds of scientific journals, and every independent published scientific review, with the necessary implication being that thousands of dastardly scientists have been secretly colluding in a massive conspiracy to fake their data for the last 30 years.
|
Just for the record are you suggesting that the exaggeration of real scientific data has never been used to promote political agenda? Because that is all that I suggested in my opinion about the UN.
Quote:
|
I hate to be an “annoying” skeptic, but, are there any logical steps between the premise and conclusion here?
|
I stated that my opinion was formed based on my feelings about the UN and the thing I have read. The formation of an opinion does not always require logic.
In my opinion Maryann is hotter than Ginger. That is based on the way they look and their personalities, but they are fictitious characters played by actresses 30 years ago. There is no logic, there is no argument, it is just my opinion.
Quote:
|
Uh, no, there never was a “consensus of scientists” that we’re headed into an ice age. You’ve been snookered by Steve Milloy again. You really need to try to be a bit more skeptical of random stuff you drink off the intertubes, even if it has a tangy grape flavor.
|
Can you be more specific. If not "consensus", what was it? The view of one, many, none? Was there no scientific basis for the claim? What? Try to do more than just say how wrong I am, add value - I am still learning, are you?
Quote:
|
In other news, NASA been making a heck of a lot of money the last 50 years promoting their political agenda that the earth is round. I can’t believe they got away with it. Those sneaky bastards!
|
The shape of the earth is known and the issue has been settled. The earth is not a perfect sphere or round as you wrote, it is slightly oblong.
If NASA has a political agenda to promote the earth as a perfect sphere, I would not support that. Would you?
Quote:
|
Have you followed the money to Exxon yet, or did your clever sleuthing trail just plumb peter out?
|
Yes. I own some stock in the company. I figure if you can not beat them join them.
My lifestyle and standard of living is based on a big "carbon footprint". I have an interest in the status quo. I am biased, that is why I spend so much time trying to poke holes in the global warming theories that humans are responsible. It may be true, but I don't want it to be. But if it is true, I am willing to change, but all of my questions have to answered and my concerns addressed. And if an organization other than the UN is behind the cause. The UN has zero credibility in my book.
The risk that humans are responsible for global warming is why I ask questions and share my concerns. But you take the position of making fun of me, rather than working with me on the issue. Believe - there are millions of people just like me. If you want to help change the world, participate in the dialog and understand people like me. Making fun of my comments just ticks me off.
