AGW deniers further ape creationists

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Just keep your hands up in surrender.
The vote mentioned neither donkeys, apes or creation. These words are your twisted malfunction of the English language my good friend.

Errm, yeah.

Are you going for the for the ATS greatest number of inane random posts ever in a thread record?

Perhaps we could petition SO to set it up

If you have nothing of interest to say on the topic, I'll just go back to saving the joules it costs me to respond to your posts. Nice speaking to you.

[edit on 26-2-2010 by melatonin]

reply to post by Donny 4 million


"Ape" in the context of the title means to copy or mimic.

"Donkey" is Mel politely saying "jackasses." If anything, this reveals that he has more tolerance for the ignorant sorts who are engaged in self-administered colonoscopies than I do.

Now you asked, "what does creationism have to do with it?"

Fair enough question. Ever read any of the anti-evolution measures passed in some states, such as Alabama? or Kansas? They cite that evolution is "only a theory", that "we don't know", that it's "age inappropriate" and of course "all opinions are valid"

Just like this bill from South Dakota did, until it got cleaned up.

You see the two camps rely on the same methods and execution. Pretend there is a controversy, then leap into that manufactured controversy. Thing is... there is no scientific debate about anthropogenic global warming; it's fact, plain as the exhaust spewing out your tailpipe. Same with evolution. These ideas are accepted by the scientific community - and not as some part of a huge conspiracy, but because this is what all the evidence points to.

Both creationists and AGW deniers rely on a "gap" method - find some space in the theory that scientists haven't filled in yet, or some detail that is still being debated, and pounce on it as if it's the keystone that will topple the entire theory.

Another similarity is that the creationist sorts are never biologists of any sort, or even geologists. Similarly, AGW deniers are almost never climatologists, meteorologists, or ecologists. In fact both camps seems to be comprised mostly of mathematical physicists and theologians.

Next similarity, decry the "politicization" of the science, while at the same time pressuring politicians to make rules in favor of science denial. You then get bills like this demanding that rather than present science as science, it needs to be presented as a philosophical debate between two equally valid sides; which of course, it is certainly not.

In fact the only difference I've seen is that creationism seems to be the province of the religious, while AGW deniers tend to just be plain vanilla stupid. Feel free to quote me there. That's stupid, with a U, not two O's.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Telegraph.co.uk

Roger Highfield
Published: 8:49PM GMT 20 Mar 2003

From Copernicus to Charles Darwin, scientific discoveries have had a habit of offending religious susceptibilities. Most scientists, even Darwin, tread warily and avoid attacking religion, but Watson and Crick are both outspoken atheists.

Speaking to The Telegraph, Crick, 86, said: "The god hypothesis is rather discredited." Indeed, he says his distaste for religion was one of his prime motives in the work that led to the sensational 1953 discovery.

"I went into science because of these religious reasons, there's no doubt about that. I asked myself what were the two things that appear inexplicable and are used to support religious beliefs: the difference between living and nonliving things, and the phenomenon of consciousness."



I read Cricks book and I remember he claimed a euphoria like feeling when he stole the discovery of the helix's shape. "I feel like GOD himself must feel." Or something very much like that.

What I find interesting about you and the OP is you are at least willing to address the subject objectively.

Don't worry about my ability to handle this subject. I can do it with logic and not have to insult anyone

Originally posted by melatonin
Absolutely hilarious.

I've noted the similarities in their arguments and behaviour for donkey's, but this takes the biscuit.

.... the South Dakota Legislature urges that instruction in the public schools relating to global warming include the following:

(1) That global warming is a scientific theory rather than a proven fact;

Methinks someone needs to go back to school to learn what a scientific theory is

And presumably they mean recent carbon emission derived global warming? Or do they really mean all global warming for whatever reason throughout geological time?*


* ie 6,000 years .........



Edit: and this is even better:

(2) That there are a variety of climatological, meteorological, astrological, thermological, cosmological, and ecological dynamics that can effect [sic] world weather phenomena

See, that drought was caused by Jupiter being in conjunction with the Moon in Pisces. And because Libra was in ascendency when the storm developed it meant it was snowier than it would have been under Sagittarius......

[edit on 27-2-2010 by Essan]

Oh look its a bunch of AGW Truthers having a little laugh amongst themselves.

Increasing co2 still followed 800 years after increasing temps.

It is still not a "cause". It's an affect (sic).

Have fun with your fantasy AGW Truthers.

BTW you guys remind me of fundies in that you were told something as little kids and refuse to let it go 30 years later even after realizing all your evidence is forged.

To be more specific you seem to be Mormon fundies.

Bye Truthers.

reply to post by Essan


They put Astrological in there so they would not offend well to do middle age urban women.

reply to post by watcher73


Come to a HAARP thread and learn about the Brainiac's Heating things up.
Looks like it back fired on their butts. I have studied global warming since way before it was a topic.
What some here want is to be worshiped as Scientists.
You know above all the rest. That in my opinion that is Communism. Worship Marx, worship Lenin,
kill the rest and install atheism.

Originally posted by mc_squared
. According to South Dakota Legislature Body Heat is the overlooked guilty party!

They sure do produce enough hot air.

Obviously someone with an ounce of nous pointed out the idiocy emerging from duranus, as they removed some of the glaring rubbish:

WHEREAS, there are a variety of climatological and meteorological dynamics that can affect world weather phenomena, and the significance and interrelativity of these factors remain unresolved

[edit on 28-2-2010 by melatonin]