Quote Originally Posted by NinjasLeadTheWay View Post
Discounting the Urban Heat Island effect in IPCC reports alone shows that Climate Models are skewed to fit the narrative. If you put UHIE data back into the datasets and actually go back to when temperatures started being recorded with any validity, say 1840ish, you would see that this entire theory of man-made global warming isn't even a thing. But of course, if I could dumb it down more maybe you'd get it but it would require you to look at the actual data and timeline and reports....and fuck it. Believe whatever you want.
Hey, don't sell yourself short. You couldn't possibly get any dumber.
Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~
Argument by Bad Analogy added to Argument by Poisoning the Wells. Good job distracting there WB, fallacious arguments are still fallacious.
I'm glad you brought this up, because I think it illustrates the fundamental difference between the two sides. There are two kinds of science: rational and empirical. Rational means to use reason, empirical means to use experiment/data. The tricky part is that rational science is the only one that makes sense rationally and empirical science is the only one that makes sense empirically; put another way, there's no way for the two sides to talk to each other. Rational science leads to beautiful, elegant, simple systems. All you have to do is basic reasoning and their verity is confirmed. It is only in rationalism that you can say things like...

-correlation is not causation
-all people have bias
-people disagree

Note how all these things are true! This is what makes rationalism so seductive, combined of course with never having to put in any work or thought to your position whatsoever.

.

Of course, the people that take refuge in these observations do so only when it is convenient for them. All of empirical science is a logical fallacy, so it is technically correct to point out that logical fallacy whenever you don't cotton to whatever it is empirical science has shown in a particular arena. Categorically embracing rationalism is for twits, and there is no law against hypocrisy.