What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The 2014/15 Off Season Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
19,421
The burden of proof is on those making the claims, merkin.

Both sides are making claims. There's no supreme arbiter of the underlying truth. At a logical level to claim that humans are not playing a significant role in climate change is no different to claiming that they are playing such a role.

At the end of the day, in due season etc, the relative upsides and downsides of getting the call wrong are also relevant.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
78,235
Both sides are making claims. There's no supreme arbiter of the underlying truth. At a logical level to claim that humans are not playing a significant role in climate change is no different to claiming that they are playing such a role.

At the end of the day, in due season etc, the relative upsides and downsides of getting the call wrong are also relevant.


Agree. Err on the side of caution for climate change and the worst case is that we have a world which is less reliant on fossil fuels and more focused on renewable energies.

Go the other way and the worst case is ?
 
Messages
42,876
Aren't both sides of the argument skeptics? Someone says global warming is happening a bunch of skeptics show up to disagree, someone says the world is fine and a bunch of skeptics show up to disagree with that. Therefore unless you are sitting on the fence we are all skeptics

This.

Both sides are making claims. There's no supreme arbiter of the underlying truth. At a logical level to claim that humans are not playing a significant role in climate change is no different to claiming that they are playing such a role.

At the end of the day, in due season etc, the relative upsides and downsides of getting the call wrong are also relevant.

And this.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
92,623
Both sides are making claims. There's no supreme arbiter of the underlying truth. At a logical level to claim that humans are not playing a significant role in climate change is no different to claiming that they are playing such a role.

So you would agree that atheism is a position based on faith?

At the end of the day, in due season etc, the relative upsides and downsides of getting the call wrong are also relevant.

Would you make the same claim with regards to the afterlife?

And can you see how anthropogenic climate change might appear to be an organised religion driven by fear?

#IfItf**ksLikeADuck...
 
Messages
19,421
So you would agree that atheism is a position based on faith?

I'd agree that it's a position that, like its alternatives, relies on 'belief' or 'assumed truths' at some level. Otherwise you get an infinite regress......just like 'Ok I believe God made the world, but who made God?' conundrum. Why not ask an atheist?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top