Quote:
|
Originally Posted by God-Like
What are you on about . Flat earther's explain their theories based upon using scientific reasoning . It doesn't have to be true does it . Just because there's science behind it . That's all I am saying . Not all scientific reasonings are true . I have given examples . Some are completely wrong .
|
I could ask you why you think it's based on science, but it would get further off topic. Needless to say, no G-L, there is no science behind the ''Flat Earth'' belief. Science rests not just on reasoning but more so on empirical observation. If reasoned argument was enough by itself than theological arguments would be scientific too.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by God-Like
I am not whinging about anything, I am giving you examples of how scientific research in other fields of work can be equally incorrect . They can be equally incorrect for many a reason, what I am saying is that science can be used to fit agendas . Big pharma isn't interested in curing illness ..whereas nutrition is all about wellbeing . I am pointing out obvious differences in regards to their foundations .
|
Yes, you like to talk about these ''other fields of work'' as a means to cast doubt on the observations and work of ecologists and environmental scientists. You also like bringing in ''big pharma'' as to say that climate science is similar. Your argument rests on conspiracy and intrigue, not science. Calling things ''big pharma'' is a clue, as is mentioning ''agendas''. You could instead focus on what the science says about climate change and skip all the politics and intriguing words, G-L.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by God-Like
You're welcome not to be interested in anything I have pointed out, that's fine, but you keep on making it out to be conspiracies when they're not . They're facts . Maybe you don't see a connection between those that invest in the vaccine and those same dudes that promote it .
|
What facts? And again this stuff about vaccines. Why do you continue to bring this up? I've no interest in it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by God-Like
It has been also said that global warming hasn't a complete consistency and it allows for colder winters .. I haven't been addressing this aspect . If you had listened to exactly what I have said then you wouldn't of carried on as you have .
All I have mentioned is that scientific explanations through research are not always correct for it depends on many factors . What are agenda based will reflect only one perspective and will use scientific research to back up that one side of the coin . It's not conspiracy based . I will leave it there ..x daz x
|
Yeah, the science can be incomplete, nobody disputes this. Accusing scientists of having some hidden political agenda and lying to us all is accusing them of conspiracy. I've no interest in the politics and SF isn't for politics anyway.
Check the OP. The thread doesn't ask for a debate on the science. It takes the science as a starting point and asks us if we're justified to look away in the face of these environmental problems and instead focus on other things. It seems a lot of people didn't read the post.