Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bradclark1
Let me guess. Your masters is in Tap Dancing?
|
HAHA.
Funny. Nope. It was in ME, and the project was in computational mechanics in Flight Dynamic Systems. I know how to do research. And how to refine theory. The scientists at the IPCC leave alot to be desired, and alot of questions go unanswered. And inconsistencies simply are not addressed. And theories like methane from cow belches damaging the atmosphere look to be guesses. I don't know, but that looks like unsubstantiated nonsense to me. It is neither proven, nor does it make actual sense when making comparisons to actual natural emissions, assuming of course those figures aren't static in their model. They look to be paid to acheive results that the UN and other intergovernmental bodies and environmental NGO's want.
You have to accept that there is reasonable skepticism that is warranted. Your fascist approach will not win you any followers. Just because someone at a scientific organization pushes a theory, it doesn't mean it's true, and everyone should shut up and accept it. Their refusal to address the simplest of inconsistencies makes me raise an eyebrow. And their total fanatical approach to eliminating anyone on the payroll who disagrees to "build a consensus" shows me something else. And it's not good at all.