CreateDebate


Debate Info

3
17
Does Doesn't
Debate Score:20
Arguments:9
Total Votes:24
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Does (3)
 
 Doesn't (6)

Debate Creator

Nomenclature(1257) pic



Apparently, Agreeing With A 97 Percent Scientific Consensus Makes Me A "Science Denier"

I wish I were making this up. I honestly do, but I'm not. I posted this official NASA statement in response to @MarcusMoon telling lies about climate change:-

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. 

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

@MarcusMoon then responded by posting an article co-written by an American economist and a businessman, neither of which have any scientific qualifications or experience, and neither of which have ever been employed by any scientific body which researches climate. When I challenged the sheer lunacy of this his response was to claim I am a science denier.

Just wtf??? Why am I here even arguing with lunatics like this?

Am I just as much of a lunatic for arguing with such utterly spectacular liars?


Does

Side Score: 3
VS.

Doesn't

Side Score: 17
No arguments found. Add one!
2 points

@Nomenclature

No--but "Science Denier" is a somewhat appropriate label based on many of your other positions. Actually, it is more accurate to say that "you lack the depth of critical thought and/or education to see much Pseudo-Science for what it is & are credulous enough to fall for much "Scientific Mysticism" (i.e. essentially believing in Sci-Fi type material as a reality rather than fiction)"

Side: Doesn't

You are correct mathfan. Nomenclature seems to be a notmathfan. He likes to jump on the religious, but he does not see that he is very religious. He believes in the epitimy of unicorns, leprechauns, spaghetti monsters, and a world where Muslims do not want to chop off our heads and make the whole world Islam.

Side: Doesn't
0 points

No--but "Science Denier" is a somewhat appropriate label based on many of your other positions.

You are a lying troll. I have never denied any form of science at any time on this website, which explains why you were unable to provide any examples to support your bitter personal attack. The opposite is in fact true (i.e. that you frequently deny science). This can be proven by, among other things, your claim that "The flow of time is an illusion". See:-

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ The ArrowofTimeisanIllusion

I am banning you for being pathetic. You cannot best me in fair debate and that is exactly why you lie so much. To be perfectly frank, you are a complete failure held together by nothing but ego.

Side: Does
OmegaPan(710) Disputed Banned
5 points

You are a lying troll. I have never denied any form of science at any time on this website

I seen you claiming their is 70 genders 1 time. I thinks this be anti science.

Side: Doesn't
2 points

You are a lying troll. I have never denied any form of science at any time on this website

You are false. You think that ass sex with wild hogs is science. This is not correct. Science is much more than you butt humping pigs and piglets.

Side: Doesn't