Sho_Nuff82
Member
Something Wicked said:You're just framing the question in a useless and trivial manner. Gravity is merely a word- a not-so-concretely defined word and perhaps an overly archaic word. "How gravity works" is what's important. Thus, saying "a particle causes smaller objects to be pulled towards larger objects [an effect of what we've classically called "gravity"] is an absolute fact" is disingenuous as saying "humans causing "climate change" [in which, I believe most arguing against me will have a difficult time concretely defining the very term "climate change" itself] is absolute fact."
And yes, I got Rorschach's joke, however, in my opinion, unbeknownst to him/her, the joke actually hurt the argument that he/she is siding.
Something Wicked said:Now, that's a damn fucking lie, but hey, it's far easier just to claim something is "fact" and not demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the equations and models behind such "facts."Every single professional scientific organization in the geosciences and every single national academy of sciences acknowledges the major contribution of humans to climate change
To those with not much of a technical background in chemistry, physics, and the engineering fields, here's a little secret: we cannot prove anything as absolute fact! Every scientific law and equation is a mere approximation of a mechanism of the universe- which all have varying degrees of error under varying conditions and circumstances. A good scientist, researcher, or engineer should not blindly accept any scientific claim as absolute fact, but should be to assign a probability to such claims and show its potential error is within an acceptable range.
Ironically, your entire rant is based on an irrational protestation to an actual fact.
Following the link that Huff Post article embedded, it is indeed a fact that every major scientific body in the world accepts that humans contribute to climate change. No amount of semantics will change that fact. Could they all be wrong? Possibly. Will their model improve as time goes on? Definitely. But what the article posted was not a lie. Derail over.