Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
High school science teachers and political science professors don't count.
In order to be considered a real scientist, you actually have to be in the field. You know, doing the actual work and producing research that can be reviewed by your peers.
Techincally, there are HS teachers who do get out into the field.
Techincally, there are HS teachers who do get out into the field.
Get out into what field? Are you claiming that a HS teacher is qualified as a research scientist out in the field publishing peer reviewed science papers?
Can you list a few examples of their research projects or name of these HS teachers?
LOL you would not know what a credible source is if it jumped up and smacked up upside the head which is why you continue posting non-credible rubbish.
This is going to be my last response to you.
1) Skepticalscience is a blog website, and even the founder calls it a blog website, the wiki calls it a blog website. I'm not sure why you got so triggered when I also called it a blog website.
2) There are plenty of peer-reviewed scientific publications which don't agree with the consensus view on climate-change. It is incredibly easy to manipulate data to fit your desired outcome.
1) Skepticalscience is a blog website, and even the founder calls it a blog website, the wiki calls it a blog website. I'm not sure why you got so triggered when I also called it a blog website.
Really you are needing me to spoon feed you AGAIN?
Nope its both a blog and a resource website. Do you know what resources they provide? Hint: Peer reviewed published papers and Climate Policies.
I've listed it several times using the Wiki link that you posted!
Skeptical Science has become a resource about climate change, and praised for its straightforwardness.
Marine biologist Ove Hoegh-Guldberg has described it as "the most prominent knowledge-based website dealing with climate change in the world",
and The Washington Post has praised it as the "most prominent and detailed" website to counter arguments by global warming skeptics.
In September 2011, the site won the 2011 Eureka Prize from the Australian Museum in the category of Advancement of Climate Change Knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
2) There are plenty of peer-reviewed scientific publications which don't agree with the consensus view on
Not very impressive for being a science professor. He's what's known as an outlier. He fits in the same outlier class as Michael J. Behe who is a science professor who believes in creationism. Confirmation bias can even be seen within the science community. It's not a common occurrence which is why these folks are outliers. That's just simple statistics...there will always be a few outliers.
Nope its both a blog and a resource website. Do you know what resources they provide? Hint: Peer reviewed published papers
I have never been to a blog that doesn't link to peer-reviewed published papers. People in this thread link to peer-review published papers. Wikipedia links to peer-reviewed published papers. Does that make wikipedia a good source?
And do all peer-reviewed papers say the same things?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
Skeptical Science has become a resource about climate change, and praised for its straightforwardness.
I'm starting to think you're getting paid to post here.
I have never been to a blog that doesn't link to peer-reviewed published papers. People in this thread link to peer-review published papers. Wikipedia links to peer-reviewed published papers. Does that make wikipedia a good source?
And do all peer-reviewed papers say the same things?
I'm starting to think you're getting paid to post here.
Likewise with the rest of you guys. Like if I didn't know any better I'd expect you guys to get your big oil paycheck next week..
I have never been to a blog that doesn't link to peer-reviewed published papers.
So?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
I'm starting to think you're getting paid to post here.
Of course you do...that's all your imagination can come up with. You just don't possess the aptitude to intelligently participate at even a basic level about this subject.
Likewise with the rest of you guys. Like if I didn't know any better I'd expect you guys to get your big oil paycheck next week..
I could understand why you feel that way, because there really are people who are paid to post here. When I was on 4chan, someone leaked a list of websites they were being paid to post on. I was surprised that this board was on the list. And another on the list was a bodybuilding forum, can't remember what else. That was back in 2016 though.
They are currently spending hundreds of millions in the midterms. So anywhere with a lot of people will be targeted by shills and troll farms.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 10-20-2018 at 01:54 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
