Junk Science - Why Can't It Be Debated?

Question

The alarmists and scammers who are feeding us their global warming propaganda have based their 'knowledge' on junk science. But not one of them will stand up and publicly debate the issue in a public forum like tv, which is the scientific thing to do. To them there is a 'concensus'...there can be no debate and it's a closed issue.

Why is this?

Answer 1

Science is not debated on TV.  It is debated in scientific journals.  The leading journals in the field have had a full and thorough debate on this issue and a consensus has emerged.  This is a consensus of qualified people that have studied the matter, not random TV viewers.  Science isn't  politics where everyone gets one vote and the most votes wins.  If you want to see the debate, you need to read the scientific literature, not the popular press.

Answer 2

Where have you been?

The first full debate on this issue began in Congress a few days ago.  But they're not debating whether it exists.  They're debating what to do about it.

Answer 3

There should be no debates in science.  Science is knowlege and should net be determined by the skill of the orator.

What I would like to see is for the believers to put their knowledge to the test.  Give us your predictions for the climate 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 and 10 years from now to see how accurate they are.

However they will not do this.  They claim that they have no clue what the climate will do in 10 years but we can accurately forecast the climate 100 years from now.

Sadly people buy into this specious logic.

Answer 4

I just heard that there is an invisible Sun that is causing all this global warming. Don't worry it's completely a normal cycle of invisible Suns.   Anybody that can prove that there isn't an invisible Sun,is just trying to raise your taxes.

There is nothing mere humans can do to stop the invisible Sun. Hey ,at least I don't 'believe' scientists!  I'm free to 'believe' anything I want.  

Oh I just heard something else about global warming.  It's caused by the friction of the Earth as it speeds through outer space.   What other things are there to 'believe' in , instead of what those pesky scientists are saying?  Could global warming be caused by worm farts?  Hey, I got a million ideas!

AGW is REAL! Get over it!  The ever widening parameters of severe weather records , shows the extent of rapid climate change.  Why do you think that the number of tornadoes has increased almost steadily every year?  We're witnessing the effects of rapid climate change right now , and still the 'discussion' is dumbed down by ignorant deniers!

Answer 5

dogma and doctrine can by definition, not be argued.

the believers are as hard headed as any religious freak.

Answer 6

Baccheus hit the nail on the head.  "Science gets debated in scientific journals.  Science does not get debated on TV."  

Facts are NOT open to debate.  

Scientists do publish findings, in journals, for peer review, which is, actually, the scientific thing to do.

Answer 7

Thats because if you debate a flat earther it only credits flat earthism for being worth debating. Bad idea. The debate has been had and it is over.

Answer 8

Good question.

When a really good point is made about the fallacy of global warming, the dana, bob, baccheus, J S, amy l, ken etc. person uses lots of alter egos to create the illusion of a consensus.

Funny really, and an example of phoniness of the "global warming consensus".

My answer is the old adage:  "When you have the facts, argue the facts.  When you don't have the facts, pound the table."  Warmers don't have the facts, only intimidation, manipulation, and deceit.

Answer 9

There's plenty of debate on the details.

But the fact that Man is warming the climate is no more open for debate than the fact that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, or that we actually went to the Moon.

Of course some people say the Earth is 6000 years old, and that NASA faked the Moon landings.  Few will care to debate that nonsense either.  It's not science.

Answer 10

Probably, because the only debate left is in the uninformed doubters mind. I would love to see someone such as you or the heartland institute GW doubters convention attendees debate actual scientists researching GW.

You call it "junk science," but if you were really qualified to term it as that, you wouldn't be on Y!/A.

Your clearly acting like a cornered animal.

BTW...It's best for scientists to debate the finer points of the science, not the public. The public should only debate the actions needed to combat what science determines as a threat. The public is wholly unqualified to determine if the science is correct.

Answer 11

Science get debated in scientific journals.  Papers are written, read and responded to.  Its all part of the process and it is all publically available if you want it.  Science does not get debated on TV.  Do you think you could sell advertising for that?

Answer 12

Ken:  Who decides when the debate is over, you or Algore?  Why would debate end before PROOF?  Afraid of what you might find?

Answer 13

They wont debate it because if they get it out into the open then all of America will finally recognize the truth. The Founder of the weather channel is actually planning on suing Al Gore just so that they can bring the debate into the open VIA Court lol.

Uninformed my .... there are thousands of highly acclaimed scientists that are skeptical about global warming.

Furthermore the IPCC is a bunch of politician scientists nominated by Governments to spread alert of climate change

Answer 14

Concensus is reached in science through a process of proving and disproving things and is not based on who shouts the loudest but on who can explain things and back them up in the most solid way. The greenhouse effect can be experimentally demonstrated, as can the rise in CO2 concentrations and the evidence of this combination causing global warming is no longer in question. You drop an apple. It accelerates to the ground at 10m/s. Gravity. Proven fact. You burn carbon. Carbon dioxide is released and the the air in which you release it absorbs more infrared radiation. This causes an increase in temperature. Proven fact.

Answer 15

It depends on the people. voluntarily or involuntarily putting up theirselves to believe or not does not bothers me at all.

Answer 16

Why give the oil and coal industry marketing that denies science any more air time than it already gets?

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfact...

---

The Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University, documents how the media supports the false appearance of controversy on the topic of global warming:

http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/05...

Creating controversy where science finds consensus

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1978

"A new study has found that when it comes to U.S. media coverage of global warming , superficial balance—telling "both" sides of the story—can actually be a form of informational bias."

Media False Balancing Allowed Extreme Views to be Treated Same as Scientific Consensus

http://www.globalissues.org/EnvIssues/Gl...

Answer 17

Because its been advertised and they teach it in schools its a shame but yea the government and the powers in charge did this to us and now its here to stay. Its the biggest scam in history and us talking about it won't make a difference what so ever sorry to say.

Answer 18

It already has been.  Over and over and over.  It's call the scientific process and it started in the 19th century.  Should we go back and debate whether or not the sun revolves around the earth?  Of course not.  

If you would take some time to read the scientific literature on the subject from the past 30 years, you'd know that a strong move toward consensus view started over 2 decades ago.  The time to debate is behind us, now is the time to respond.

Answer 19

You cannot DEBATE a "religious" belief --- such as GW.