Hey, why'd you cut off the last line of that first paragraph?? Here, i'll add it back in for ya:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Sam <sammyc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Scientific consensus is not by itself a scientific argument, and it is not > part of the scientific method. > "Nevertheless, consensus may be based on both scientific arguments and the scientific method." But of course. One study suggests only what one study suggests. It uses the scientific method. Only multiple studies could reach what is considered a "consensus", or in the case of global warming, THOUSANDS of studies. What i seek is really simple, Sam: A collection of scientific studies who's results refute the hypothesis that increased rate of change of global warming today is caused by human activity, that is larger and more convincing than the same set of studies which support that hypothesis. If you can bring that, i'm on board. If you can't, i stick with the scientists. Pure, simple, no religion involved. If you can't do that, then I won't demand that you change your position, but i will demand that you cease accusing my position of being based on "religion"...because I will have proven otherwise. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:362631 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
