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
The Holocene Deniers
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="thaumaturgy" data-source="post: 53036432" data-attributes="member: 169303"><p>Yeah. I recognize that difference. I, however, have seen little to suggest it is "won't". </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I find this interesting. You claim interest in the science and the hard-nosed assessment of data but then you seem to want to only play to the most base and ignorant and uninformed. Why is that? </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>And mathematical robustness would somehow <em>undercut</em> your position? Hmmmm.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Utterly attrocious science? Doesn't that mean that one has to understand how science deals with <em>data</em> in order to make that assessment?</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>So you want to talk only to the uninformed. The idealogue's favorite audience is one built on ignorance. That way the idealogue can spout whatever they want.</p><p> </p><p>And that is precisely why statistics comes in very handy.</p><p> </p><p>Otherwise medicine would be run by late-night TV hucksters selling voodoo cures.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I already posted a list of citations showing the <strong>fundamental nature</strong> of statistic's role in climate. If you want to avoid statistics then I recommend you not talk about climate.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Yet just about every meteorologist and climatologist and actuary and energy company accountant over the past century has been obsessing over it. But on the other side there's YOU and a couple of others who decree it "not good". </p><p> </p><p>Who should I believe? The century's worth of meteorologists and climatologists and actuaries and energy company accountants? Or you?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="thaumaturgy, post: 53036432, member: 169303"] Yeah. I recognize that difference. I, however, have seen little to suggest it is "won't". I find this interesting. You claim interest in the science and the hard-nosed assessment of data but then you seem to want to only play to the most base and ignorant and uninformed. Why is that? And mathematical robustness would somehow [I]undercut[/I] your position? Hmmmm. Utterly attrocious science? Doesn't that mean that one has to understand how science deals with [I]data[/I] in order to make that assessment? So you want to talk only to the uninformed. The idealogue's favorite audience is one built on ignorance. That way the idealogue can spout whatever they want. And that is precisely why statistics comes in very handy. Otherwise medicine would be run by late-night TV hucksters selling voodoo cures. I already posted a list of citations showing the [B]fundamental nature[/B] of statistic's role in climate. If you want to avoid statistics then I recommend you not talk about climate. Yet just about every meteorologist and climatologist and actuary and energy company accountant over the past century has been obsessing over it. But on the other side there's YOU and a couple of others who decree it "not good". Who should I believe? The century's worth of meteorologists and climatologists and actuaries and energy company accountants? Or you? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
The Holocene Deniers
Top
Bottom