[Cerek]

Originally Posted by SpiritWarrior Well, I have already given that info. in earlier posts here and then even pointed to the answer for RTB. As a testament to your commitment, I was waiting for you to glean the answers to that very easy question. When you asked me after I previously said it more than once, it looked lazy is all. But maybe you didn't see. Between then and now, you could have looked up the answer thousands of times. Both of these were already covered in this thread. In fact one of your questions was answered by me in one of my first posts here. Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to have made the jump from denying science agrees, to demanding just what they agree upon. Why's that? Lol, I have? I may have mentioned how science is united on the issue but personal verification suggests (at least to me) going out and doing the actual experiments. Unless you mean I support the findings, which then I agree with. While we're talking about research, have you watched that movie yet? You've had like three years to do so. Again....this is science. That statement belies an ignorance of the entire practice as a whole. You would do well to talk with at least one expert and and ask them to explain the premise of the whole thing to you. Man, you really don't like to work huh? You are asking me more than I ask of you, since you have done no research. Which is why I keep telling you to conduct some. But you'd rather sit here with no knowledge and ask that I join the dots for you. This would be acceptable if you had no way of gaining the info. yourself but we know this is not the case. You might even enjoy the process. This is not communication, that's you asking me to do your homework for you, which is a disservice to you. The communication part was when I suggested avenues to pursue. I have already pointed you in the right direction, the rest falls on you. Personally, I find it odd that you haven't jumped at the opportunity to prove us wrong - you could blow the lid off this whole thing! The scientific community is at your fingertips, why not go get 'em?

I've not asked you to do any of my work for me. I've just asked you show me the work you've done for yourself, the same as I ask my 6th graders to show their work on assignments. If they don't show their own work, there is no way for me to be certain they haven't just copied the answers from the book or from a partner. The ones that complain about showing their work are usually the ones that haven't done it.

To be fair, I looked back over all your posts in this thread to see if any of your posts actually did answer one of my questions. As suspected, it did not. You simply stated - again - that all scientists on the planet are in agreement on this issue without providing any links or data to support that continued assertion. Since your posts all say basically the same thing "Science is in agreement on this issue", I asked (not "demanded") for clarification on what parts of the issue science is in full agreement on. Any group can walk outside while it is raining and all agree on the fact that rain is falling, but that doesn't mean they all agree on what is causing that particular rain storm. So, I just asked you to clarify the points on which this full agreement exists so we could work from a common foundation. As usual, it fell to another member to actually provide even this basic piece of information (BTW, thanks for doing that, Chewie).

You see, while I do question both the impact that humankind is having directly on GCC and the alleged "complete agreement" of scientists on this issue, I'm willing to look at the evidence objectively to determine how compelling their arguments are. As with any scientific research, the most common place to start is by examining the studies done by others and evaluating the conclusions reached, then look over the data and see if you agree with those conclusions. That is all I've asked, that you show the work you've studied which led to your conclusions so I can look at the same data. This is a commonly accepted practice in science. But, just like the GCC scientists, you refuse to share your own data and insist everyone just accept the fact your findings are correct unless they can prove otherwise with data of their own.

Although I've known it for a long time, looking back at your posts in this thread and those in the previous discussion of this topic, it is easy to see your responses are nothing more than a shell game. You make a bold assertion without providing any proof, then claim the burden of proving your claim false falls to everyone else. When asked to provide the simplest answers on your claim, you just move the shells around a couple of times and continue making the same claim while still providing nothing to actually back it up. In this thread, Chewie stepped forward to provide the information requested. In the previous thread, it was machinehead that took the time to provide a link.

When I looked over that link again, I did find something interesting at the end that I had not noticed the first time. A quote from NASA's Gavan Schmidt:

"...the fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the AGU or EGU meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists (not the famous ones, the ones at your local university or federal lab). I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts at the Fall meeting (the biggest confernce in the US on this topic) that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist.

I had wondered where your suggestion to "call scientists at the local universities and then at the non-local universities" had come from, since that is a rather odd suggestion even by your standards, but then I saw Mr. Schmidt's quote and realized where it came from.

So the shell game continues with you switching the shells around while relying on others to provide any information on the subject. It's been entertaining to watch, as always, but just as with any shell game, the only winning move is to do just that - watch and not play.

If you ever decide to have a serious discussion on the topic, I'll be glad to participate. Until then, I'll just continue watching your game with the rest of the crowd.