That science being:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/19/united-nations-climate-global-warming-ipcc/
Oh that house of cards crumbled really fast, didn't it?
-
If this is supposedly settled, evolution stands on far firmer ground. Does this mean those who agree about the state of this science will agree to stop bringing up creationism and intelligent design?
Dol-Fan Dupree and Fin D like this. -
-
gafinfan, Stringer Bell, Lab3003 and 1 other person like this.
-
Celtkin, MikeHoncho and Soundwave like this.
-
JJ we have a religion and spirituality subforum
-
My question stands to the people who don't acknowledge the scientific basis for evolution but stand by the claim that global warming has been ruled out by science: what consistent standard results in those positions? -
the aspects of religion that are political we allow as well, but your first post was out of place
you are framing the question in a way that imo does not belong here and ultimately implies something that should not be discussed in the POFO. i am moving this thread to science forum for now as it doesnt pertain to politics.adamprez2003 and MikeHoncho like this. -
I am not sure how this pertains to anything but politics. The question at its core seems to me to be whether there is a standard for what science is or whether there is a political bias at play.
I guess that's a bit uncomfortable for the membership, though.Dol-Fan Dupree likes this. -
Guest
-
Certain scientists may not have abided by standards, but clean air is still a good thing. One counter-criticism: newsletters by green advocacy groups are certainly not sufficient for citation, but student theses, if the students did the proper research and were successfully defended, should be.
-
we can discuss cap and trade for example in the POFO -