Not exact matches
While I am not religious (I will call myself agnostic), and having an IQ well over genius levels, with scientific and mathematical tendencies, let me ask you a few questions, because what I see here are a
bunch of people talking
about «no evidence» or «proof» of God's existence, therefore He can't possibly exist, existential
arguments, which are not
arguments, but fearful, clouded alterations of a truth that can not be seen.
I know I have made the
argument that more info
about natural forcings being really strong, all the more makes it a matter of prudence to totally reduce as much A-GHGs as possible & pronto, since we wouldn't want at situation in which both the natural forcings (a
bunch of volcanos or greater solar output in the near future) to piggy - back with our anthropogenic greenhouse forcings.
I will address an
argument that you (and others) have been making lately
about PS Now — I bought a
bunch of DVD but I should not expect Netflix to allow me to watch them for free.
I know I have made the
argument that more info
about natural forcings being really strong, all the more makes it a matter of prudence to totally reduce as much A-GHGs as possible & pronto, since we wouldn't want at situation in which both the natural forcings (a
bunch of volcanos or greater solar output in the near future) to piggy - back with our anthropogenic greenhouse forcings.
But Perry's
argument, which seems to amount to «environmentalists make a
bunch of ballyhoo
about pollution, but prosperity and the free market have prevented that dangerous pollution over the last 40 years», astonishingly omits any reference to the Clean Air Act that forced industry to apply pollution controls.
Re # 77 My point is Sadlov is a pretty smart guy; he's not going to try to win an unwinnable
argument about what the biases might be in a
bunch of people he's never interacted with.