The first of four parts where Professor Bob Carter uses the scientific method on the popular theory with global warming being linked to CO2 levels. He examni...
You've utterly ignored almost every critical reply to your posts about climate disaster. You really should play by the rules of decent discussion. Answer peoples challenges. Don't ignore them. Don't state random ideas with shoddy evidence, discard what people have to say and the go ahead and post yet another link or video. This breaks the most important rules of rational free thinking discourse.
Davis, I'll respond to you because you aren't hiding behind a pseudonym. Let's talk, let's communicate. We have a lot in common. Are you or are you not willing to discuss this?
I have questions about why you believe what you do. I do not understand. I am seeking information about your position because it confuses me. The metaphoric ball is in your metaphoric court.
I grow weary of the ad hominems. I tire of the laziness of consensus acceptance versus science discussions. That ratio is completely upside down for me. This group doesn't really like to be questioned about this belief. I get that. This is our common ground, that because I don't think the same as you, I am to be the subject of ridicule. For the record, I don't think I'm the one who looks silly.
If ThinkAtheist is not hospitable for questions regarding beliefs, feelings and impressions about science, than perhaps we can all agree that this site is no longer this site for me.
Why don't you start by going back to all of those replies on your original post that you've ignored and start answering them?
@ Gallup's Mirror
Look, I'm sure you're cool as hell. I feel like we both understand that religion causes suffering, and public discourse via the Internet is an amazing force. This is the information age. I read a good book years ago which pointed out a greater level of accountability due to the availability of more information.
No disrespect intended, but I doubt reading everything you wrote. The circumstances seem perfectly predictable to me. Here may be where we part ways.
I hate to have to take someone else's words out of my mouth, but when my point of view is falsely characterized/ attirubuted/ lied about, yeah, I take exception (and so should everybody).
"You didn't ask any scientific questions."
You begin with nonsense. I introduced science which questions the need for alarm. This cool, new geocentric fanaticism and closed mindedness does not do it for me.
So called atheists have substituted carbon for sin and Al Gore for Jesus Christ! Our essential biology depends on our continued ability to produce carbon dioxide. We are carbon based life forms.
While I am aware that what I say bothers people, I feel like I've earned a jihad. If people can't handle certain questions, fine. This dialog advances elsewhere.
First, I introduced science which questioned popular climate dogma (the video).
Next, you said that I hadn't raised any questions. Maybe it is more accurate to say that you do not recognize my question. This seems deceptive to me, and I do not feel it is a fair characterization of my actions.
Then I pointed out that I was in fact questioning something, and you doubted that I had a raised a question. I insist, I am raising a question - of science.
Do you see that I am raising a question?
Lastly, I am not yet in a position to devote all of my time to these discussions; few have that much time to devote to it. I am not alarmed, but I am bothered by green policies keeping the third world right where they are. Policies kill, but rational discourse can influence policy.
To begin with an absurdity (I have not raised a question) undermines the value of subsequent remarks.
Yeah sure, people on this site will say all kinds of rotten stuff about me. Despite my cute avatar. Accepting alarming absurdities always diminishes the quantity and quality of human life.
First you introduced a thread where you claimed global warming was dogma.
Claims don't end with question marks.
I mean no disrespect by not replying to all of these posts.
However if I keep getting misquoted, discussion cannot advance.
Join Think Atheist
Welcome toThink Atheist
Get Started Nowor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Started by Unseen in Law, Trials, and Decisions. Last reply by matt.clerke 3 hours ago.
Started by Stephen Brodie in Miscellaneous Sciences. Last reply by TJ 3 hours ago.
Started by Stephen Brodie in Crime and Punishment. Last reply by TJ yesterday.
Started by Stephen Brodie in Miscellaneous Sciences. Last reply by Jake LaFort 23 hours ago.
Started by Belle Rose in Theistic Arguments and Debate Help. Last reply by Unseen 7 hours ago.
Sunday School February 7th 2016
Sunday School January 31th 2016
Sunday School January 24th 2016
Posted by Davis Goodman on February 11, 2016 at 11:30am
Posted by proudAthiest on February 10, 2016 at 5:00pm
Computer Help Forums
© 2016 Created by umar.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.