IS "SCIENCE" THE "NEW RELIGION"?

[Atlas]

HTH

[Atlas]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh0woT7NkKI

[Atlas]

And, no, it is not I who relies on YouTube and google, it is Sam.

[Atlas]

I'm sorry. Some of the stuff I posted last night wasn't appropriate. I was having a hard time, and had a bit too much to drink.

[Atlas]

This was a good thread. I fucked it up. Sorry. Carry on. Please.

[spidersandsnakes]

Well, I've always been more scientifically minded and less religious.....I only hope science does not become the new religion otherwise we're back to square one (see the thread on paedophile priests!!!!!). I don't think it will though because while religion is based on "FAITH" alone (what does faith mean anuway!!??) while science is based on experimental fact!!!

[BIGDAN]

Yes, I know you never mentioned them, it was just an example of this conversion.

"God is man" is a universal affirmative proposition, so you had to use the u.a.convert, and you used it wrong.

But it changes only the concept, it does not change your point that much.

Is "science" the "new religion"? Yes, most probably. Science is a mystery to masses, in the same way religion is (or was).

But is science the new religion? In my opinion, no, and it can never be.

I am a scientist to be, I study to be a physicist, and yet (by now) I am religious, in my own way. Science is something I do, and love, and it can never be mixed with something as powerful as religion. They can coexist, actually I see the world as a kind of symbiosis of these two.

One of my college professors, academician V. Paar, warns that global warming is not the planets biggest problem, he has a theory of his own that global warming is just an introduction to a new ice age.

Hi 'Tristan'

"God" can be "Man" and vice versa without using the u.a.convert, just like i have done, and i am glad you can see my point about the MISS USE of SCIENTIFIC DATA by our Governments to Bamboozle us with Science just like they did for millennia with Religion, seems some people didn't quite get that that was my question, and my only question, i was in no way trying to put down Science or Scientists, i have had MY degree for 30+ years now so i would be disgracing myself to imply that i was wouldn't i?

But as usual any interesting Topic i try to create to induce some little Interest in what has become a very boring Forum gets somewhat Hijacked or Sidelined and i become ridiculed in some way by someone a third to half my age and who has little to no worldly experience compared to myself but thinks he/she knows far much more than i do, and thinks I'm fair game for them to show how educated they are and this i would imaging gives them an enormous hard on, so i have at least accomplished that, i can get them aroused in a way they can never accomplish with me, well that isn't my intention so I'll withdraw from this debate that has gone so far off track that only GOD can bring the balance back.

Thanks to all that understand where i was coming from, the rest can kiss my? well you can at least agree on that cant you, so its good night from ME and its good night from HIM, GOOD NIGHT.

Regards, Danny

PS, Here's something i can believe in regarding Man Made Global Warming and how it may not effect us, anyone heard of Milankovitch cycles?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100,000-year_problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycle

[MMAharaja]

Have I been trolled, or is this guy serious?

I see you got your degree over three decades ago. I'm not surprised that your understanding of climate change seems stuck in the 70s.

[MMAharaja]

But as usual any interesting Topic i try to create to induce some little Interest in what has become a very boring Forum gets somewhat Hijacked or Sidelined and i become ridiculed in some way by someone a third to half my age and who has little to no worldly experience compared to myself but thinks he/she knows far much more than i do, and thinks I'm fair game for them to show how educated they are and this i would imaging gives them an enormous hard on, so i have at least accomplished that, i can get them aroused in a way they can never accomplish with me, well that isn't my intention so I'll withdraw from this debate that has gone so far off track that only GOD can bring the balance back.

I know the word "epic" is overused by us young'uns, but that sentence is epic in every sense of the word. It's ridiculously long, and it features a hero (you).

You're older than me, but I can find people who are older and more educated than you who agree with my positions on climate change and gods. If the facts are truly on your side, why don't you use them to refute my points? Why do you have to resort to flaunting your age?

[BIGDAN]

I know the word "epic" is overused by us young'uns, but that sentence is epic in every sense of the word. It's ridiculously long, and it features a hero (you).

You're older than me, but I can find people who are older and more educated than you who agree with my positions on climate change and gods. If the facts are truly on your side, why don't you use them to refute my points? Why do you have to resort to flaunting your age?

Then go find them a leave ME the FCUK alone, i have no use for your attacks on ME, i see no point to them and if it continues I'll be reporting you to? whom i haven't decided as of yet, until them my sentences will continue to be as long as i make them, if that offends you then report me to the Agencies Concerned and see how far you get, oh and another thing, can you keep on topic and post something remotely interesting for other forum members to read as your incessant attacks on ME both in this and previous topics doesn't interest them at all, and one more thing, there are No Facts about Climate Change and Modern Mans Guilt over it, its all supposition, just like Religion, Science is becoming as Unbelievable, if people like you and your older generation of friends are going around Preaching these so called FACTS which in FACT are nothing more than THEORY, when you have REAL FACTS then please feel free to inform US, until then, keep stum, and what an EPIC SENTENCE that was don't you agree.

No Very Kind Regards, Danny

PS, Didn't you say your were playing with me in a previous thread? if so the that makes YOU the TROLL and not ME, so you had better watch out because TROLLS around here don't last too long.

[Mona]

Science is based on observation and fact, not faith. It is flexible and it changes with what we know: religion does not. Science does not demand that people worship it. We don't pray to science, and we don't get mad at science when something goes wrong. Science is not a religion.

[MMAharaja]

Then go find them a leave ME the FCUK alone, i have no use for your attacks on ME, i see no point to them and if it continues I'll be reporting you to? whom i haven't decided as of yet, until them my sentences will continue to be as long as i make them, if that offends you then report me to the Agencies Concerned and see how far you get, oh and another thing, can you keep on topic and post something remotely interesting for other forum members to read as your incessant attacks on ME both in this and previous topics doesn't interest them at all, and one more thing, there are No Facts about Climate Change and Modern Mans Guilt over it, its all supposition, just like Religion, Science is becoming as Unbelievable, if people like you and your older generation of friends are going around Preaching these so called FACTS which in FACT are nothing more than THEORY, when you have REAL FACTS then please feel free to inform US, until then, keep stum, and what an EPIC SENTENCE that was don't you agree.

No Very Kind Regards, Danny

PS, Didn't you say your were playing with me in a previous thread? if so the that makes YOU the TROLL and not ME, so you had better watch out because TROLLS around here don't last too long.

This is the last post I made in response to you before you decided to ignore the debate and focus on your age and worldliness:

Regarding global warming, I wouldn't say that the science is being used for any purpose other than to keep its predictions from becoming reality. In a sense, the scientists' goal is to see a day where their predictions do NOT come true. If anything is being "USED" in this scenario, it's the government.

I agree that the best explanations offered by science are not necessarily fact. Until we've collected every shred of data possible, you can't prove any claim. But based on what we do know, global warming is very, very real. To say that the consensus of the world's climate scientists is "just someones [sic] idea" is insulting to the thousands of people who have devoted their lives to the field.

Here's an example that I hope will hit home with you. You notice a strange smell in your house. Eventually, you find out it's an electrical problem, so you call an electrician. He tells you there's a 90-99% chance that your house will catch on fire in the next few weeks due to bad wiring. You're skeptical, so you call another electrician. He tells you the same thing. You call another . . . and another . . . and another, and they all say the same thing. Finally, the 31st electrician has good news! There isn't anything to worry about! But then 30 more electricians tell you exactly what the first one did. They tell you there's a 90-99% change that your house will burn down.

What would you do in this situation? Would you listen to the 97% of experts that say you're in danger, and ask for suggestions? Or, would you say to yourself, "until it happens its all supposition really," and then sleep well knowing that one out of 31 electricians says your house is fine?

Of course I'd prefer to keep debating this issue. I didn't take the time to type a 300 word argument just to have you change the topic to yourself and ignore the points I brought up. If you'd rather tell on me than address the issues I've brought up, that's your prerogative, but aren't you a little too old for that?

[davidb]

One thing I find kind of funny. Last year when Washington DC got all that snow, people were quick to denounce warming because of that. Don't they know it actually snows more when the temperature is closer to 32F than when it's 15F ? But because of all the white stuff, people think it's colder. I'd wager that those days that snowed so heavily had actually been colder in previous years, just no snow to accentuate and hyperbolize the winter conditions.

[silvermedalist]

Of course Einstein did not believe in the kind of god that the vast majority of religious people today believe in.

But even if I toss that out the window and accept the argument that Einstein believed in God, why is that important? Why have you put Einstein on a pedestal? He died decades ago and he's just one man. Did he have some kind of supernatural insight that no other scientists did? Many of today's physicists know much more about how the universe works than Einstein did. The National Academy of Science (which includes the leading scientists in the USA) is composed of 72.2% atheists, 20.8% agnostics, and only 7% who believe in a personal god.

He probably used Einstein as an example. That many scientists, doctors and well educated men and women do believe in God. And the statement quoted with those words of Einstein make perfect sense. You cannot igmore science. But one has to believe that there was a beginning. You cannot get something from nothing. and even if you want to go back to the theory that gases stated this chain reaction leading to a big boom, where did the gases come from? So there is always unexplainable questions that will arise in science. Though the established,proven facts of science are not open to debate. We know the world is round and nobody can debate that any more. We know that the planets circle the Sun and the moons circle the planets for instance. But religion, though most entirely based on belief, does have its own record and its own historical record and much of it is very compelling

[MMAharaja]

He probably used Einstein as an example. That many scientists, doctors and well educated men and women do believe in God. And the statement quoted with those words of Einstein make perfect sense. You cannot igmore science. But one has to believe that there was a beginning. You cannot get something from nothing. and even if you want to go back to the theory that gases stated this chain reaction leading to a big boom, where did the gases come from? So there is always unexplainable questions that will arise in science. Though the established,proven facts of science are not open to debate. We know the world is round and nobody can debate that any more. We know that the planets circle the Sun and the moons circle the planets for instance. But religion, though most entirely based on belief, does have its own record and its own historical record and much of it is very compelling

Why can't you get something from nothing?

Even if you can prove that you can't get something from nothing, why should anyone plug that gap with a god instead of just saying, "we don't know the answer yet, so let's try to figure it out"? You mention that we know the planets circle the sun, but there was a time when people did not know that. Religion had answers that turned out to be wrong, and science, not religion, gave us the truth. Science is only a few hundred years old, but it's already replaced so many of our myths with facts. If you believe that just because we don't have answers today, we never will, you lack perspective. Science has a track record of making God less and less important every year. In fact, most of today's arguments for God have him filling gaps in our knowledge that science, not religion, discovered (and that science, not religion, will fill with facts).

[BIGDAN]

[quote name='MMAharaja' timestamp='1284952527' post='482785'

Of course I'd prefer to keep debating this issue. I didn't take the time to type a 300 word argument just to have you change the topic to yourself and ignore the points I brought up. If you'd rather tell on me than address the issues I've brought up, that's your prerogative, but aren't you a little too old for that?

[Magic Fills the Air]

As expected, this thread has turned rather unpleasent. I don't think it makes any sense to start attacking people simply because they are younger than you. Research has shown that people tend to reach their mental and creative peak in their 20s and that's when they do their must productive thinking. Hence the reason why most PhD students tend to fall into this age catergory. Secondly, I'm not arguing with anyone here just to make myself feel big. I'm an academic, I work at a university and this is what I do everyday with my students (although I wish some of them had the enthusiasm for debating that some members here have). I hate confrontations which this thread is turning into, but I do like intelligent debates. I personally find it insulting that someone would suggest I come on here and make valid arguments because it makes me feel like an arrogant bighead.

The point made above about the world not becoming warmer, well as I said before, scientists no longer call it 'global warming' but rather 'climate change'. The summer is just ending here in the UK and it hasn't been warm, but it has been wet, and we've had more rainfall than usual. It is these fluctuations in weather patterns that scientists are concerned about in the long-term. This winter gone, the UK had some of the coldest weather in decades. It only takes a drop in a couple of degrees in tempertaure for the Gulf Stream that keeps the UK warm to be switched off. If this were to happen we would be plunged into another ice age.

Yes, I agree with you Danny, what captures and stores carbon emissions better than anything else on earth are rainforests. But the biggest rainforest on earth, the Brazillian rainforest, is being cut down at an unprecedented rate. Despite efforts by governments to police it, it continues to be cut down illegally because the people who live amongst it rely on it for income. The other major obstacle to combating climate change is population growth. Until governments start controliing the birth rates in countries like India and Pakistan, the majority of the human race has very little chance of survival.

Regarding the Big Bang, yes MMAharaja is right, it's very possible for something to come from nothing because it is also possible for something to become nothing, for example our bodies after we die. To the person who called Prof. Stephen Hawking a 'nutter' (you've just insulted a genius!), he argues that the universe started a singularity - a point of zero volume. Of course there's still holes in our knowledge of the creation of the universe, but that doesn't mean that we should stop theorising and fallback on religion to answer our questions.

On the subject of religion, in the 1950s the English philosopher Bertrand Russell once said that if I told you a giant teapot was orbiting the sun nobody would be able to disprove my assertion however mad it may sound. However, if such a teapot was part of the teaching of ancient books, and was instilled in the minds of children that it was sacred, then people would be less hesitant to dismiss it, and it would inevitably have a powerful influence over their lives.

[BIGDAN]

As expected, this thread has turned rather unpleasant. I don't think it makes any sense to start attacking people simply because they are younger than you. Research has shown that people tend to reach their mental and creative peak in their 20s and that's when they do their must productive thinking. Hence the reason why most PhD students tend to fall into this age category. Secondly, I'm not arguing with anyone here just to make myself feel big. I'm an academic, I work at a university and this is what I do everyday with my students (although I wish some of them had the enthusiasm for debating that some members here have). I hate confrontations which this thread is turning into, but I do like intelligent debates. I personally find it insulting that someone would suggest I come on here and make valid arguments because it makes me feel like an arrogant bighead.

The point made above about the world not becoming warmer, well as I said before, scientists no longer call it 'global warming' but rather 'climate change'. The summer is just ending here in the UK and it hasn't been warm, but it has been wet, and we've had more rainfall than usual. It is these fluctuations in weather patterns that scientists are concerned about in the long-term. This winter gone, the UK had some of the coldest weather in decades. It only takes a drop in a couple of degrees in temperature for the Gulf Stream that keeps the UK warm to be switched off. If this were to happen we would be plunged into another ice age.

Yes, I agree with you Danny, what captures and stores carbon emissions better than anything else on earth are rain forests. But the Brazilian rain forest is being cut down at an unprecedented rate. Despite efforts by governments to police it, it continues to be cut down illegally because the people who live amongst it rely on it for income. The other major obstacle to combating climate change is population growth. Until governments start controlling the birth rates in countries like India and Pakistan, the majority of the human race has very little chance of survival.

I was not pointing the finger at you magic, but i will defend myself against all and anyone who attacks or insults me first, and i will use all means at my disposal, so i apologize for nothing in my fight against Internet bullying and personal attacks, the unpleasantness started with someone much younger, someone with a grudge against me and who started on me in a previous topic and brought his venom in to this one, which is about Scientific data being used to create a New Religion not about global warming, which was a topic that i started months ago but one which few people seemed interested in at the time but feel the need to discuss it in this one.

And one point i must wholeheartedly agree with you on is that if the Gulf Stream fails then Europe, especially Britain would see some of the worst weather humanity has ever had the misfortune to see, and if MMGW is true then we will be only too glad that no one bothered to stop it or slow it down. In the short term the weather is very unpredictable but in the long term we know there is an ice age coming, we just don't know when it will get here do we?

Regards, Danny

PS, "Research has shown that people tend to reach their mental and creative peak in their 20s and that's when they do their must productive thinking."

Not according to this they don't.

http://uk.askmen.com/daily/austin_150/154c_fashion_style.html

"By now, we do know that your creativity and brain activity are at their peak during your youth. We also know that your hardwiring and ability to put ideas into action fully blossom during your early 30s. It’s at that time that your logical skills, cognitive abilities and experiences are most likely to converge for maximum effect. Therefore, it’s reasonable to suggest that you’ll hit your mental peak between the ages of 30 and 35."

Knowledge is a product of Age not Youth, have you ever heard of this old saying? "Young Men THINK Old Men Fools, Old Men KNOW young Men are"

[Magic Fills the Air]

I was not pointing the finger at you magic, but i will defend myself against all and anyone who attacks or insults me first, and i will use all means at my disposal, so i apologize for nothing in my fight against Internet bullying and personal attacks, the unpleasantness started with someone much younger, someone with a grudge against me and who started on me in a previous topic and brought his venom in to this one, which is about Scientific data being used to create a New Religion not about global warming, which was a topic that i started months ago but one which few people seemed interested in at the time but feel the need to discuss it in this one.

And one point i must wholeheartedly agree with you on is that if the Gulf Stream fails then Europe, especially Britain would see some of the worst weather humanity has ever had the misfortune to see, and if MMGW is true then we will be only too glad that no one bothered to stop it or slow it down. In the short term the weather is very unpredictable but in the long term we know there is an ice age coming, we just don't know when it will get here do we?

Regards, Danny

PS, "Research has shown that people tend to reach their mental and creative peak in their 20s and that's when they do their must productive thinking."

Not according to this they don't.

http://uk.askmen.com/daily/austin_150/154c_fashion_style.html

"By now, we do know that your creativity and brain activity are at their peak during your youth. We also know that your hardwiring and ability to put ideas into action fully blossom during your early 30s. It’s at that time that your logical skills, cognitive abilities and experiences are most likely to converge for maximum effect. Therefore, it’s reasonable to suggest that you’ll hit your mental peak between the ages of 30 and 35."

Knowledge is a product of Age not Youth, have you ever heard of this old saying? "Young Men THINK Old Men Fools, Old Men KNOW young Men are"

Yes, there is another Ice Age coming but we don't know when it will be. I just get so annoyed when people say it isn't getting warmer like the scientists said it would (and especially, 'I was looking forward to the warmer weather'!). Humans survived the last Ice Age, but then there were fewer of us and we were made of hardier stuff back then!

Research vaires about people's creative peak, (I read one study which said it was in the 50s!), but anyone under the age of 35 is technically considered to be 'young'. The human brain is at its peak of asborbing information from the ages of 18 to mid-20s (although in the case of males it's usually a couple of years later). From my experience academics produce their best research from their mid 20s to early 30s.

[BIGDAN]

Regarding the Big Bang, yes MMAharaja is right, it's very possible for something to come from nothing because it is also possible for something to become nothing, for example our bodies after we die. To the person who called Prof. Stephen Hawking a 'nutter' (you've just insulted a genius!), he argues that the universe started a singularity - a point of zero volume. Of course there's still holes in our knowledge of the creation of the universe, but that doesn't mean that we should stop theorising and fallback on religion to answer our questions.

Hi Magic,

What Prof. Stephen Hawking has done in his lifetime is remarkable, but like Prof Einstein he has become rather eccentric in his later years, i hope his contemporaries treat him better that Einsteins did who saw him as a rather pathetic figure in scientific circles.

He was a plagiarist of the first order and although Prof Hawking does not show this trait he walks the fine line of Genius and Nutcase, will he go over the edge, only time will tell, and time is still very relative.

Regards, Danny

http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/heroworship.htm

[Magic Fills the Air]

Hi Magic,

What Prof. Stephen Hawking has done in his lifetime is remarkable, but like Prof Einstein he has become rather eccentric in his later years, i hope his contemporaries treat him better that Einsteins did who saw him as a rather pathetic figure in scientific circles.

He was a plagiarist of the first order and although Prof Hawking does not show this trait he walks the fine line of Genius and Nutcase, will he go over the edge, only time will tell, and time is still very relative.

Regards, Danny

http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/heroworship.htm

Well Danny, they say there's a very fine line between genius and eccentricity! Some of the most intelligent people I've met have been eccentric beyond belief, but this doesn't make them nutcases. I have too much respect for their work to apply such a label.

[MMAharaja]

Lets get one thing clear, you tried to attacked and ridicule me in a previous topic and then again in this one, i didn't let you get away with that, now you want to debate the issue with me? that's why you got both barrels.

This debate is about how i believe Governments Manipulate Scientific Data to their own ends, I'm not having a go at Science or most Scientists, but some have in my opinion come to the wrong conclusion about Man Made Global Warming or are so worried about their Government Funding that they will collude with their Governments and bend the Data to their own ends.

Here are some that i believe aren't getting worried about speaking their mind and saying that they don't believe in MMGW or that the evidence to support it is risky or that the reason for MMGW is unknown.

http://en.wikipedia...._global_warming

My main opposition is the way we are being told than CO2 is the main culprit whereas Methane and Clouds are 100 times better at retaining heat and are 1000s of times more abundant in the atmosphere.

In my view its more about the Carbon Cycle than CO2, more vegetation means more CO2 will be absorbed from the Atmosphere, so we need more Forests and less Plantations. But when you look back through time you find that this is not the worst time for CO2 levels, its not the hottest the world has even been by far and that we are moving in to an 90,000 year cold spell which could start any time soon, so why all the worry about how much CO2 we are giving off when China and India creates as much Greenhouse Gasses as the rest of us put together, and in the West our Governments are doing very little to curb their ways and introduce other forms of nonpolluting energy forms such as Solar, Wind, Wave and such like.

I would think that if MMGW was becoming so bad all these factors would be being dealt with in a much more robust way than they now are in my opinion, so base on that fact and the fact that an ex politician, Al Gore, got so involved and the many Scientists who disagree with the way the data has been analysed and presented i come to the conclusion that MMGW is not a Major Factor in Climate Change and the reasons lay elsewhere, like the 100,000 year cycle.

Are you OK with my explanation now and my reasons for saying that the use of Scientific Data makes "Science the New Religion" or have you come to your own different conclusions?

Regards, Danny

PS, I have no intention of telling on you or anyone else, i have been a victim of those type of people before and i don't want to join them in petty recriminations, it was my way of trying to stop you and me saying something we might regret, we are under scrutiny every time we type a word on here and the headsman's axe is always ready to fall and its very sharp.

Water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, but you're wrong if you think methane is a bigger factor than carbon dioxide. Also, humans contribute to the methane concentration of the atmosphere, so do you think the government should be doing more to reduce that?

Of course we need more forests. I emphatically agree with you on that point. I'm happy to say that I've planted many, many trees and plants, and will continue to do so. You say your view is more about the carbon cycle than CO2, but humans across the world are taking carbon out of the ground and putting it into the air (in the form of CO2). Our machines are affecting the carbon cycle on a global scale. Planting more trees will certainly help, but it's also important to reduce the amount of carbon that we add to the atmosphere. If there's a hole in your boat and it's filling up with water, you can use buckets to throw the water out, but you should also try to plug the hole.

I also agree that it's not the hottest the world has ever been. The problem with using that fact as a point in your favor is that the creation of modern human culture is a recent event. We're not built to thrive in extremely hot climates. Neither are our economies, agriculture, etc. Many of our largest cities would be underwater if the planet was as hot as you're talking about. The problem is that the planet is getting warmer right now. Before we worry about a 90,000 year cold spell, let's worry about getting through the next hundred years. The data show that the planet is getting warmer, and there's more than a 90% chance that humans are at least partially to blame.

"MMGW" is a major issue. The fact that the masses aren't taking it more seriously should be something you find very troubling, not something that influences whether or not you agree with the science. Judge the science based on the science itself, and what the scientists are saying, not based on what China is doing or the fact some scientists don't like Al Gore's approach. Again, I ask how you would respond if 30 out of 31 electricians said your house is in danger of burning down if you don't do something. Would you take action, or would you sleep well knowing that 3% of the experts say your home will be fine?

[BIGDAN]

Well Danny, they say there's a very fine line between genius and eccentricity! Some of the most intelligent people I've met have been eccentric beyond belief, but this doesn't make them nutcases. I have too much respect for their work to apply such a label.

Forgive me? a bad choice of words, would "Fruit Cake" be more appropriate?

Regards, Danny

[BIGDAN]

Water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, but you're wrong if you think methane is a bigger factor than carbon dioxide. Also, humans contribute to the methane concentration of the atmosphere, so do you think the government should be doing more to reduce that?

Of course we need more forests. I emphatically agree with you on that point. I'm happy to say that I've planted many, many trees and plants, and will continue to do so. You say your view is more about the carbon cycle than CO2, but humans across the world are taking carbon out of the ground and putting it into the air (in the form of CO2). Our machines are affecting the carbon cycle on a global scale. Planting more trees will certainly help, but it's also important to reduce the amount of carbon that we add to the atmosphere. If there's a hole in your boat and it's filling up with water, you can use buckets to throw the water out, but you should also try to plug the hole.

I also agree that it's not the hottest the world has ever been. The problem with using that fact as a point in your favor is that the creation of modern human culture is a recent event. We're not built to thrive in extremely hot climates. Neither are our economies, agriculture, etc. Many of our largest cities would be underwater if the planet was as hot as you're talking about. The problem is that the planet is getting warmer right now. Before we worry about a 90,000 year cold spell, let's worry about getting through the next hundred years. The data show that the planet is getting warmer, and there's more than a 90% chance that humans are at least partially to blame.

"MMGW" is a major issue. The fact that the masses aren't taking it more seriously should be something you find very troubling, not something that influences whether or not you agree with the science. Judge the science based on the science itself, and what the scientists are saying, not based on what China is doing or the fact some scientists don't like Al Gore's approach. Again, I ask how you would respond if 30 out of 31 electricians said your house is in danger of burning down if you don't do something. Would you take action, or would you sleep well knowing that 3% of the experts say your home will be fine?

Hi 'MMAharaja'

As someone who has taken the time and effort to learn how to fix anything that needs fixing in my house i would tell the electricians to take a hike and do the work myself, as i have done for 25-30 years now. I'm not saying i could do the work as quick but i can do it much cheaper and i do not cut corners, all my work is done to a professional level, its safe and tidy and i pay nothing for the labour.

And that's is how i live my life, all Data, Scientific or otherwise can and is manipulated to one degree or another, i cannot trust Politicians, Lawyers or Accountants because they all have agendas which revolve around money and power. Some Scientists are paid for by our Governments, which are run by those same Politicians, so i tend not to believe any Scientist that are in league with our Governments.

Now you can call me a fool for thinking like that but that is the way i view the world, i extrapulatete as much information as i can, i evaluate it as best as i can, and i come to my own conclusions using as much Fact as i can, much as i have dealt with all the so called Profesionalalal Builders i have come across in my life. If i am wrong in believing the Scientists that get no financial help from Governments for saying what those Governments want them to say then i'm wrong, but thats is how i do it.

When the US and Britain and all the rest of the wealthy countries start to act like there is need to change their ways due to MMGW then, and only then might i start believing all the hype.

Please do not think i have come to my conclusions on a whim, i have spent years thinking and countless hours researching Global Warming and Climate Change, my conclusion is that Mans contribution is insignificant to the contributions of Volcanosos and other phenomenonna, if you think differently then thats your choice and your right, just as my thinking is my choice and right.

Agree to disagree with me rather than go on the attack in future and you will get a better responce from me.

Regards, Danny

PS, This topic is still about Science being the New Religion, anyone have any thoughts on that?

PPS, By the way, whats your answer to MMGW? or how we can effect Climate Change to our advantage, do you have answers that will work and that Governments will be ready and able and want to use, if so i want to hear about them.

[MMAharaja]

I don't like doing this, but I can't help myself. I'm chopping this up and keeping it pithy.

Hi 'MMAharaja'

As someone who has taken the time and effort to learn how to fix anything that needs fixing in my house i would tell the electricians to take a hike and do the work myself, as i have done for 25-30 years now. I'm not saying i could do the work as quick but i can do it much cheaper and i do not cut corners, all my work is done to a professional level, its safe and tidy and i pay nothing for the labour.

So you would acknowledge that there was probably a problem and take action. That's the answer I was looking for.

And that's is how i live my life, all Data, Scientific or otherwise can and is manipulated to one degree or another, i cannot trust Politicians, Lawyers or Accountants because they all have agendas which revolve around money and power. Some Scientists are paid for by our Governments, which are run by those same Politicians, so i tend not to believe any Scientist that are in league with our Governments.

The difference is that science has peer review. Others can replicate your experiments call bullshit if your data are fabricated or manipulated. Your reputation will be damaged and your study will not be taken seriously. That's part of the reason science works (and why science should never be compared to religion).

Now you can call me a fool for thinking like that but that is the way i view the world, i extrapulatete as much information as i can, i evaluate it as best as i can, and i come to my own conclusions using as much Fact as i can, much as i have dealt with all the so called Profesionalalal Builders i have come across in my life. If i am wrong in believing the Scientists that get no financial help from Governments for saying what those Governments want them to say then i'm wrong, but thats is how i do it.

Sometimes you have to defer to the experts. No matter how wise and worldly you are, climate scientists know more about the climate than you do. When you make claims that contradict the consensus of those who have devoted their lives to a field, you better have some earthshaking evidence to support your claims.

When the US and Britain and all the rest of the wealthy countries start to act like there is need to change their ways due to MMGW then, and only then might i start believing all the hype.

Please tell me why the science itself isn't as important to you as how the masses react to its conclusions.

Please do not think i have come to my conclusions on a whim, i have spent years thinking and countless hours researching Global Warming and Climate Change, my conclusion is that Mans contribution is insignificant to the contributions of Volcanosos and other phenomenonna, if you think differently then thats your choice and your right, just as my thinking is my choice and right.

I'm starting to notice a pattern. This is the fundamental difference between you and me. You think you have a better understanding of a subject than the people who have devoted their lives to it.

PPS, By the way, whats your answer to MMGW? or how we can effect Climate Change to our advantage, do you have answers that will work and that Governments will be ready and able and want to use, if so i want to hear about them.

I don't claim to have the answer to global warming. Ask a climatologist.