Yep. It’s a logical consequence of Relativism, the religion of the left. The one that was brought over by the communists to undermine just about everything in this country.

If everything is relative, then there is no truth. If there is no truth then there is not scientific truth. If there is no scientific truth, then there isn’t even anything wrong with faking experimental results. You might as well get the outcome you prefer.

They even have a core scientific theory, universally accepted, that proves everything is relative (or at least, it proves you can never know the truth with certainly).

“the Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that certain pairs of physical properties, like position and momentum, cannot both be known to arbitrary precision. That is, the more precisely one property is known, the less precisely the other can be known.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

Imagine living a life where you can never really know what’s right or wrong.

Why, you would be a liberal, wouldn’t you? And you would be opposed to religion. And you couldn’t accept the concept of allies. And the government would have as good or better chances to be right about something than you would. And the Constitution would have to be malleable. And judges couldn’t seek the truth, only an approximation of the truth that would change at a later time. And no truths “would be self evident”.

You would be in Obamyland.

I doubt they teach such critical thinking in schools anymore.

But scientists with an agenda can be the worst thing…not to mention the foundation for most crappy sci-fi movies of the 1950′s.

Today’s scientists have nothing on the religious leaders who jailed Galileo.

The age of pure science or actually collecting data before issuing rash, publicity-generating statements is long since over.

So it was dinosaur farts that killed the dinosaurs. ’cause they made a big nasty climate change.

Sounds like funky science to me…

but you gotta hand it to them for sticking with the lie. they’ll never back down. never

I sat there and quietly debunked every loose leap of logic made to include that there are is no plantlife there that thrives on CO2.

I understand the implications…I’ve done the experiment with the covered fishtank full of CO2 and the one with “regular” air.

But I’ve also been to Biosphere II which was money spent on an abysmal failure.

The way I see it, I do believe that “man” has altered the environment….but not to the degree or the severity that certain people would have us believe. It is also never explained that the Sun puts out a variable amount of energy over time. It is “relatively” constant but not perfectly so. Then, the Earths’ orbit is an ellipse…not a circle….additionally, gravitational anomalies can pull the Earth closer to the Sun over time….for an undefined period of time.

There is much to study…much to learn. Ice cores and a backyard thermometer do not “empirical data” make.

For every point a supporter of “climate change” or “global warming” and every point they make, there is an equally compelling and just as reasonable counterpoint. The evidence is not satisfactory at this point and I would dare say that even an 8th grade science teacher would tell the student that there isn’t enough data yet to reach a definitive conclusion.

We have only clues.

But so far, it’s like saying that because you found a cat hair in your apartment that there must be an entire clutter of cats living there.

:)

Who knew?

So sick of the smelly chicken little crap that passes for truth in the environmentalist movement. If you listen to them, they are generally anti-capitalists pushing other social objectives than the environment – they usually claim that things that improve the standard of living – and the developed world itself – are causing the destruction of the planet! Not disputing species extinction or that certain habitats are at risk in slash and burn practices in Africa and the Amazon, but 90% of the movement is phony and just into scare tactics!