My latest response to Potholer and a repeat of my challenge for him to follow through with the live debate he agreed to. @ScottAdamsSayshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XycF0uCuByQ …
-
-
Replying to @Tony__Heller @SteveSGoddard
I can't judge the underlying science, but it isn't credible to me that climate scientists don't have an answer for why temperature feedback is not perpetual. Seems they would have noticed that obvious problem.
21 replies 13 retweets 102 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays
I find very little in mainstream climate science to be even remotely credible, and see little indication most climate academics understand basic science or have the skill set to do so. Mostly an exercise in self-serving group think by people with a huge conflict of interest.
5 replies 20 retweets 71 likes -
Replying to @Tony__Heller @SteveSGoddard
You think the entirety of climate science failed to notice that their theory implies perpetually increasing or decreasing temperatures?
14 replies 1 retweet 14 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays
Wegener's theory of Continental Drift was obviously correct from day one, but it took mainstream science 60 years to accept it. My geology professor Bob Dietz at ASU was one of the people who finally broke the deadlock. Gave me a good understanding of how group think works.
8 replies 22 retweets 66 likes -
Replying to @Tony__Heller @SteveSGoddard
I can see that as giving you both context and bias. But it isn’t predictive of other situations.
6 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SteveSGoddard
I know you don't like analogies Scott. But I repeat if you've seen one walking, quacking, #$%*%ing critter that you call a duck - and later see one that looks and act just the same, it is probably a duck too.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I prefer the scientific method. But if “quack similarly” is all you need, good for you. Sounds easier.
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SteveSGoddard
It is an example of scientific group think and bias and how the establishment can be blind to contrary evidence. It does not prove or disprove AGW. Resisting change occurs with the best of intentions.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.