Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Is global warming just another End-of-the-World delusion?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lucy Stulz" data-source="post: 63300586" data-attributes="member: 328376"><p>Ummm, because your questions aren't answerable. But I can make conclusions based on the obvious differences in results.</p><p></p><p>And again I must point out that Anderegg et al. CONFIRMED THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE TOP FOUR CITED ARTICLES BY EACH AUTHOR.</p><p></p><p>Not a "pump and dump" as you are apparently used to doing in your line of work.</p><p></p><p>Besides, again, <strong><em>YOUR QUESTIONS WILL HAVE TO YIELD SUCH HUGE DIFFERENCES IN THE FINAL COUNTS AS TO RENDER THE p-value ON THE MANN-WHITNEY U-TEST TO >0.05 UP FROM 0.000000000000001</em></strong>.</p><p></p><p>If that is what you think is the REALITY of the situation, YOUR OWN ANALYSIS showing this should be elementary.</p><p></p><p>Do the analysis. Do the same type of analyses that Anderegg did and SHOW HOW YOU WIND UP WITH SUCH A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THE MANN-WHITNEY test p-value!</p><p></p><p>Easy peasy!</p><p></p><p>Or keep playing "creationist" and just find something to doubt.</p><p></p><p>It's safer that way for folks like you who have<strong>clearly no real training in the basic science involved in this debate</strong>.</p><p></p><p>So long as you don't have to face up to the SCIENCE you can always hide off in the weeds of "Google Scholar Searches"!</p><p></p><p>LOL!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lucy Stulz, post: 63300586, member: 328376"] Ummm, because your questions aren't answerable. But I can make conclusions based on the obvious differences in results. And again I must point out that Anderegg et al. CONFIRMED THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE TOP FOUR CITED ARTICLES BY EACH AUTHOR. Not a "pump and dump" as you are apparently used to doing in your line of work. Besides, again, [B][I]YOUR QUESTIONS WILL HAVE TO YIELD SUCH HUGE DIFFERENCES IN THE FINAL COUNTS AS TO RENDER THE p-value ON THE MANN-WHITNEY U-TEST TO >0.05 UP FROM 0.000000000000001[/I][/B]. If that is what you think is the REALITY of the situation, YOUR OWN ANALYSIS showing this should be elementary. Do the analysis. Do the same type of analyses that Anderegg did and SHOW HOW YOU WIND UP WITH SUCH A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THE MANN-WHITNEY test p-value! Easy peasy! Or keep playing "creationist" and just find something to doubt. It's safer that way for folks like you who have[B]clearly no real training in the basic science involved in this debate[/B]. So long as you don't have to face up to the SCIENCE you can always hide off in the weeds of "Google Scholar Searches"! LOL! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Is global warming just another End-of-the-World delusion?
Top
Bottom