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
Politics
American Politics
Green new deal NOT about climate? Chakrabarti indicates about economy
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="carlv_52" data-source="post: 74115609" data-attributes="member: 420395"><p>Oh, yeah, as for the "ones allowed to speak"...well, there are indeed a tiny minority who are skeptical of the science. We should always listen to them...and indeed, if you read what the actual scientists say you'll see the back-and-forth. YOU TOO can see the conversation between Michael Mann and the critics of the Hockey Stick (like McIntyre and McKitrick) and YOU TOO can figure out if you agree with M&M's treatment of principal component analysis. How do YOU do your PCA? Do you drop PC's? Which convention do YOU use? (Also note, again, if you are familiar with this topic, that M&M did make a valid criticism which was actually accepted by Mann, but strangely enough it didn't change the entire conclusion of Mann.)</p><p></p><p>The reality of the situation on the ground is far more subtle than simply "ignoring" or "not allowing to speak". But it DOES require an actual understanding of the technical details of the topic before one can willy-nilly decide to ignore 97% of scientists and go with the 3%.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="carlv_52, post: 74115609, member: 420395"] Oh, yeah, as for the "ones allowed to speak"...well, there are indeed a tiny minority who are skeptical of the science. We should always listen to them...and indeed, if you read what the actual scientists say you'll see the back-and-forth. YOU TOO can see the conversation between Michael Mann and the critics of the Hockey Stick (like McIntyre and McKitrick) and YOU TOO can figure out if you agree with M&M's treatment of principal component analysis. How do YOU do your PCA? Do you drop PC's? Which convention do YOU use? (Also note, again, if you are familiar with this topic, that M&M did make a valid criticism which was actually accepted by Mann, but strangely enough it didn't change the entire conclusion of Mann.) The reality of the situation on the ground is far more subtle than simply "ignoring" or "not allowing to speak". But it DOES require an actual understanding of the technical details of the topic before one can willy-nilly decide to ignore 97% of scientists and go with the 3%. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Green new deal NOT about climate? Chakrabarti indicates about economy
Top
Bottom