RE: Bad Science Almost Imposing Restrictive Laws
January 16, 2013 at 5:11 pm
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2013 at 5:15 pm by Creed of Heresy.)
Really? Roy Spencer? You're quoting Roy Spencer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer...ent_Design
Not to poison the well or anything but the guy calls Intelligent Design a valid scientific theory.
Sorry, but my opinion of a man who thinks ID is a valid theory isn't really worthy any credibility as a scientist.
Who lost faith in evolution, huh? Well there's the problem right there.
How does that old saying go? Oh, right! "The burden of proof is upon the person making the claim." God is claimed. There is no evidence for god. Evolution is claimed. There's fucktons of evidence for evolution. Global Warming is a myth, it is claimed. Evidence against global warming often turns out to be shallow skin-deep science that looks at only what it wants to without looking deeper into the issue to determine actual cause and effect. Evidence FOR global warming is often what happens when you look beyond the skin-deep data global warming deniers will bring up and start using ACTUAL science rather than just skin-deep science.
Roy Spencer is a fraud and a failure as a scientist.
Also, Dr. Droz is a physicist. What, exactly, does a physicist know about meteorology, exactly?? Physics and meteorology are two very distinct scholastic pursuits that are very, very unrelated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer...ent_Design
Not to poison the well or anything but the guy calls Intelligent Design a valid scientific theory.
Sorry, but my opinion of a man who thinks ID is a valid theory isn't really worthy any credibility as a scientist.
Quote: "Twenty years ago, as a PhD scientist, I intensely studied the evolution versus intelligent design controversy for about two years. And finally, despite my previous acceptance of evolutionary theory as 'fact,' I came to the realization that intelligent design, as a theory of origins, is no more religious, and no less scientific, than evolutionism. In the scientific community, I am not alone. There are many fine books out there on the subject. Curiously, most of the books are written by scientists who lost faith in evolution as adults, after they learned how to apply the analytical tools they were taught in college."
Who lost faith in evolution, huh? Well there's the problem right there.
Quote:Science has startled us with its many discoveries and advances, but it has hit a brick wall in its attempt to rid itself of the need for a creator and designer."
How does that old saying go? Oh, right! "The burden of proof is upon the person making the claim." God is claimed. There is no evidence for god. Evolution is claimed. There's fucktons of evidence for evolution. Global Warming is a myth, it is claimed. Evidence against global warming often turns out to be shallow skin-deep science that looks at only what it wants to without looking deeper into the issue to determine actual cause and effect. Evidence FOR global warming is often what happens when you look beyond the skin-deep data global warming deniers will bring up and start using ACTUAL science rather than just skin-deep science.
Roy Spencer is a fraud and a failure as a scientist.
Also, Dr. Droz is a physicist. What, exactly, does a physicist know about meteorology, exactly?? Physics and meteorology are two very distinct scholastic pursuits that are very, very unrelated.
