From comments below, for the edification of the spineless retard in question, and for the amusement of my readers.

“Consensus is not science.”

Talk about a blatant non sequitur. Actually, calling that statement a non sequitur gives it too much credit. How about a “meaningless series of words strung together by an imbecile trying to sound smart.”

let’s see: Non sequitur, you ignorant pusbag, means “it does not follow”. Of course, it does follow, because the commentor describes “scientific consensus” which, of course, is utter nonsense. To say that ‘consensus is not science” is the specific and carefully chosen phrase that describes what the commentor doesn’t understand, which is, at the heart of the matter, is that Consensus is merely an agreement to belive a specific thing. “belief” is not science. Witness that at one time there was a “scientific consensus” that the earth was flat. A “Scientific consensus” that ozone was good for asthma sufferers. a “scientific consensus” that we were on the brink of a new ice age. a “scientific consensus” that the world’s entire supply of fossil fuels would be exhausted by 2004. No, a “consensus” would be an agreement between a group of people to behave in a particular way, for instance, or believe a specific theory. And there is no “consensus” among scientists on the issue of global warming because the “scientists” that arrived at the “consensus” disregard and ignore anyone who disagrees with them. For there to be a consensus, it requires- here, this from Wikipedia is a good quote: “Achieving consensus requires serious treatment of every group member’s considered opinion”. Guess the consensus just eliminated all dissentors from their group.

Do you know the first thing about the philosophy of science?

Um, no. Nobody does, because there isn’t such a thing. there is philosophy, based in belief, and there is science, based in observable fact. You believe in global warming, and like all recto-cranial inverts, you feel free to attempt to enforce your beliefs on others. I have facts- and science- at my disposal, rather than belief, and of course, i know you are wrong.

Are you even remotely acquainted with the phrase “scientific consensus”?

Why, yes, yes I am. It’s a shibboleth created by the left to sell the idea that capitalism should be destroyed to save mother Earth. It’s moonbat insanity at it’s worst.

Ever heard of “peer review,”

Why, yes, yes I have. have you? “Peer review” means opening your scholarly work to the scrutiny of other experts in the field. And not once has any “expert” in the global warming field ever submitted his work to anyone not part fo the Global Warming cabal, because the facts simply do not support thir assertions, and they know it. Period.

fucktard? Heh heh, he said fucktard, Beavis.

Boo Hoo! he called me a fucktard! how original. Next.

Oh please, educate us further on global warming, Mr. Consensus-Is-Not-Science.

Frankly, you are incapable of being educated, as far as I can see.

This is hilarious.

yes, yes on this we can achieve consensus. the earth is billions of years old, we have had thermometers for 500 years, and we know the earth is heating up because of a sample so statistically insignificant it wouldn’t be a blip on anyone’s radar. Most hilarious thing I’ve heard, every time I hear it it’s funnier and funnier.