Why, when asked for evidence do libs quote consensus of opinion?

Question

Consensus of opinion is NOT proof of anything. Yet, when libs are asked for proof of global warming, they ALWAYS quote consensus of opinion. Libs, can you, or any of your quoted scientists present provable facts, rather than opinion? Opinions are like noses- everybody has one, but most of them smell.
-

All the answers have failed to give any proof. One "set of data" is from some obscure place in the UK. One responder quotes "An Inconvenient Truth", pure fiction from Hollywood. Most of the "proofs" are, as I said, "scientists agree". I repeat, prove that WE caused it, and that WE can stop it- PROVE IT! Don't quote fictitious opinions.
-

Answer 1

Consensus of opinion within their own little, fantastic world IS proof to a liberal.
History has shown us that consensus of opinion was proof the world was flat, the earth was the center of the universe, there was only three basic elements and man will never fly.

Answer 2

I'll make this easy...click the link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Note the source of the data: Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia and the Hadley Centre of the UK Meteorological Office

Data set: HadCRUT3, a gridded dataset of global historical surface temperature anomalies. Data are available for each month since January 1850, on a 5 degree grid.

Now look at the graph. along the bottom are years, spanning 1850 to basically present. On the other axis are temperature variances. Zero represents the average temp from 1961-1990.

Now the graph gets higher from left to right, indicating a rise. A rise in what? Temperature.

The graph says that in 1850, the temp started out around -0.3 degrees C lower than the 1961-1990 average, and now in 2007, the temp is almost 0.5 C higher than the 1961-1990 average.

i'd say that after looking at all this temperature data, dating back to since we started measuring it, yes, the global temperature is warmer now than it was in 1850.

If you can read the graph and the data it represents, YOU CANNOT ARGUE THAT THE WORLD IS NOT WARMER NOW THAN IT WAS IN 1850.

Now we CAN debate the cause, but that is another question.

Edit: I must point out how to debate as well. If you are going to dispute this, YOU now must come up with a chart that goes down from left to right using a similar collection of scientific data. IF you do we will go from there, until then you have fallen into the same category of people you were ranting against.

Oh i'm sorry the "obscure" data from the National Meteorlogical Office of the United Kingom isnt good enough for you. Thats the same as saying the our US equivalent, NOAA, is obscure.

You're an idiot and will remain so since you cannot objectively look at scientific research that disagrees with you with an open mind.

And JUST to follow up again, i'm going to give you the temperature data from the United States National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration too, that says the same thing...here you go.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/images/temp-anom-larg.jpg

I hope its not too 'obscure' for you. idiot.

Answer 3

Is there some kind of proof that there isn't global warming? Do scientific reports mean nothing? It's like predicting the weather. If there is a tornado warning, the wind is blowing so hard the trees are bending, and the hail is beating upon your roof, do you go to your basement or just stand by the window to see if its going to blow you away?

Answer 4

You can do anything you want with statistics. All you have to do is find the people that want to say what you want to hear, and then record those answers.

Its basically what goes on here... Some one put forth a "Bush is the Devil" rant... and 10 other loons chime in with the same song with no debate of thought... and then the ranter gives them the nod for best answer..

Same thing.

Answer 5

Consensis of opinion is sometimes called an election. Our consensis of opinion on November 7 of last year put the Democrats in charge of both houses of Congress.

Answer 6

Did you watch "An Inconvenient Truth"?

How many more FACTS do you need?


Why do we support scientific research if we don't want to believe the scientists when they tell us something that we don't want to hear??

Answer 7

Tit for tat, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, you give me ****, I give you ****, six of one, half a dozen of the other, both sides of the same coin. You want more?

Answer 8

N. Cognito,please tell us you're not serious about Prison Planet? They claim Elvis founded the Americas.

Answer 9

consensus negates authority, which is why you people have such a hard time with it.

NEXT!

Answer 10

care to support your claim by showing an example? or did you waste your entire day thinking of this question?