Climate change denial is >>>/x/ And anyone caught denying

File: 1476273623028.jpg (216KB, 605x763px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 605x763px

wrong again brainlet, you'd know this if you weren't an undergrad with your head so far up your ass that you can't even read what the scientific method is

the burden of proof is on _you_ to demonstrate the validity of the theory of climate change

File: sigh.jpg (3KB, 127x131px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 127x131px

>>8750003
Oh well i guess i should belive it beccause an Army man said its true.

Which is an appeal to authority fallacy.

And when your making fallacies like this. There is no wonder that you are driving people away from beliving in climate change.

>>8750024
nice bait

>>8750024
Why would he make it up? The army thrives on oil, they are the last people to go all eco-warrior. But if a reduction in good land is causing wars to break out they have to say something about it.

>>8750019
>the burden of proof is on _you_ to demonstrate the validity of the theory of climate change

You're the one who sounds like an undergrad

File: 1481469783278.jpg (234KB, 634x875px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 634x875px

>>8750086
>positive claims through the scientific method require no evidence
really makes me think

>>8750102

>there is no evidence

That's what I'm refering to, not your childish assumption that people here don't understand a meme that's been spammed since 2010

>>8750047
Its not a matter of weather he made it up.

Its a matter of weather he can prove his reasoning to be true. Whereas all hes done so far is make a claim that people believe because they perceive him to be of a higher rank than them and assume he must know what hes talking about.

This is why an appeal to authority fallacy is a fallacy.

If his statement is based on a erroneous premise, then the product will be erroneous.

>>8750029
>hes never heard of an appeal to authority fallacy

>>8750111
>Whereas all hes done so far is make a claim that people believe because they perceive him to be of a higher rank than them and assume he must know what hes talking about.

Op never claimed that at all

File: Hmmm.jpg (43KB, 537x537px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 537x537px

>>8750111
>weather
Well played.
I think the army men should shut their pie holes before the little people start asking questions about that enormous carbon footprint and seemingly giant loophole in the great quest to save earth through rationing the little peoples carbon.

Then again a clever marketing genius might be able to spin that a bit.

>>8750003
I agree though you shouldn't ban people because the pol and x retards will think you are trying to discredit them and will only fuel their stupid nigger ideas.

File: aclimatedenial.jpg (33KB, 553x525px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 553x525px

>>8750019
May as well believe in aliens.

>>8750114
>Op never claimed that at all

Yes he did. The meaning of his picture is clear to see.

It contains the terms "US Defence secretary" and "SAYS" and "Climate change".

Now just because someone SAYS something doesn't prove climate change. That requires actual science. And is thus a completely orphaned conclusion from the next statement "denying climate change should be banned".

Your fallacious statements and interpretation, along with the threat of BANNING all decent is exactly what makes me so sceptical of climate change.

>>8750126
>weather

Actually thats a typo.

>>8750003
climate change is /x/ you dumb /x/tard. Get off my board.

File: ooooahh.jpg (50KB, 599x563px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 599x563px

>>8750132
Science is not conducted by democracy you imbecile.

This proves to me that you dont even understand scientific method.

Tell me, if when Einstein came out with General Relativity everyone said
>"Hyuk, there are far more scientific articles that believe in a Newtonian universe than ones that dont, therefore democracy decides whats true".
Where would we be now?

Science =/= democracy.

>>8750003
KEK

Even their own people are fucking turning against it. Everyone that's relevant in the government has accepted climate change.

But I guess if a lawman said it's not true, then we should hold his opinion more than a simple armyman's or the state secretary. This is getting more pathetic by the day.

File: UFO denial.jpg (54KB, 553x525px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 553x525px

>>8750132
Here you go buddy. More /x/ science for you.

>>8750003
Even when the US military aknowledges something, it fails to take it seriously and something catastrophic happens. It's not that significant.

>>8750003
Why contribute another thread to this, knowing damn well it will lead to some retard doing the exact thing you take issue with. Any threads relating to climate change, no matter the stance, should go on /pol/, or /x/. Cancerous threads such as this are to be pruned.

>>8750160
I think I get what you're trying to do but it doesn't work, for reasons that should be obvious unless you're mentally handicapped

>>8750148
im pretty sure he's trying to say that the evidence supporting climate change is overwhelming when compared to evidence not supporting it.

>>8750019
Science does not have burden of proof.
It works within a different logical framework.
And "making models that explain the world" is how it's done.

>>8750631
>>>/x/

>>8750003

>he wants to ban all the engineers

i have mixed feelings about this

File: 36rDk.png (402KB, 573x406px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 573x406px

>>8750019
It's already been prooven dumbass!