(
bit_pattern): "
Denier = Truther. Same mentality, same logic."1. Really? I remember some statistic that found more truther Democrats than truther Republicans (maybe it was self-identified "liberals" and "conservatives".
Yes, really, I don't care what side of the political divide you find yourself on, whether you subscribe to either AGW denial or 9/11 Twooth then you've gone down the same rabbit-hole.
2. Tell you what, find the least integer t such that 205t gives a remainder of 12 when divided by 43 and a remainder of 27 when divided by 53 and get back to me. Or prove that p|(p-1)!+1 <=> p is prime (Wilson's theorem). No fair looking it up. Then we can talk, okay, genius?1. Opponents of the AGW theory are hardly "climate change deniers".
Ah, yes, that old trick. Try to complicate the issue to a degree that the plebes will be fooled into thinking its just soo complicated that only self-professed geniuses like you can see through the lies and expose those dastardly and duplicitous scientists. it's the internet version of the Wizard of Oz bedazzling the poor peasants by talking in Latin.
One problem with the evidence for the AGW theory is precisely the abundant evidence for dramatic changes in climate before widespread burning of fossil fuels. Pulling a CO2 signal out of very noisy data is trickey.
It's not a "problem" at all, it actually is very instructive in calculating things like climate sensitivity. We can see how the planet has responded to increasing CO2 in the past. We know what causes climate to change, there are only a few fundamental forcings in the system and we can see how they have interrelated throughout history. Past climate changes are a problem for deniers more than anything because they can't explain most of them unless the calculations on sensitivity in the climate system are about right (and which have remained essentially unchanged since they were first calculated in the 19th century). Past climate change is a huge problem for any science deniers prepared to honestly assess and understand the actual evidence we have.
2. For starters, stop applying pejorative labels like "denier" to the opposition. It reinforces the impression that advocates for the AGW hypothesis must rely on intimidation rather than evidence.
If you feel intimidated by having your anti-science denial labelled as such then stop denying science. Pretty simple, I would have thought.
