View Single Post
Old 04-06-2013, 04:24 PM   #662 (permalink)
NeilBlanchard
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,858

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,358
Thanked 2,862 Times in 1,800 Posts
Scientists know how the scientific process works, and they respect the conclusions from other fields of study. Climate science is multidisciplinary and as such, there is a LOT of peer review. All of the scientists I listed know enough about science to know that the rest of climate science is right because the parts of it they know about are right.

And like evolution, you cannot make it go away by ignoring it. All the overlap between different fields of study mean that if one is wrong, then they are all wrong. So like evolution, if you want to argue that it isn't correct, you'll have to convince the other scientists that they are also all wrong.

The facts are out there, and if you want to ignore them, that is your loss. If you have a better theory that fits the data, take that up with the climate scientists. There is no part of the science as I understand it - that doesn't fit the world that I see. The data continues to accumulate, and it will affect you and all the rest of us whether or not we accept what the scientists are telling us.

Tell me Arragonis, what will it take to convince you? If all the Arctic ice melts in the summer, will that convince you? If the ocean level continues to rise, will that convince you? If the ocean gets even more acidic, will that convince you? If high temperature records are set at a 5:1 ratio to low temperature records, will that convince you? How much of the tundra has to melt to convince you?
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/