Dr HaxZaw
New Member
Flood risk 'doubled' by greenhouse pollution
I saw this this morning and i geuss what annoys me the most is that sceintists have taken data over a 50 year period and are using it to prove something. Most people will agree that the world is at least 10,000 years old so if you work it out they have taken a .005% section of time and are using that to prove something. Im sorry but if scientists are going to claim that all their "sceintific research" is accurate they are going to have to wait another couple of hundreds years before i'll be accepting it.
Just wondering what other people out there thought of this
I saw this this morning and i geuss what annoys me the most is that sceintists have taken data over a 50 year period and are using it to prove something. Most people will agree that the world is at least 10,000 years old so if you work it out they have taken a .005% section of time and are using that to prove something. Im sorry but if scientists are going to claim that all their "sceintific research" is accurate they are going to have to wait another couple of hundreds years before i'll be accepting it.
Just wondering what other people out there thought of this