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.
Nothing to disagree with. The process might be flawed (in this one case), but not the science involved, nor the theory it supports.
(kind of surprised you posted it, i thought about looking for it online when i watched it on the National)
Is that your interpretation of what he was saying? OMfG, is there no end to the spin.
If they have been fudging the data (see my previous post on ONE example) and now can't produce the original, raw data, the science and the theory are in the crapper.
If the result can't be reproduced (which is what science is all about), then the theory is false.
Is that your interpretation of what he was saying? OMfG, is there no end to the spin.
If they have been fudging the data (see my previous post on ONE example) and now can't produce the original, raw data, the science and the theory are in the crapper.
Sanrene, I dont know if you saw that congressional hearing earlier this week but that is exactly what the wacky left is saying!
These guys may have messed some stuff up but it doesn’t have any real impact on the “science of AGW”.
I just about fell out of my chair while watching. That is total bull! Every aspect of AGW rests on the work of CRU.
ALL of it. CRU’s main purpose is to prove that there has never been a period like the current period. If you cannot get rid of the MWP, then you cannot say the warming today is because of mankind.
ALL of AGW rests on the work of CRUs work to get rid of the MWP. These guys are a freaking joke, but they have powerful politicians who are propping them up.
The Speaker of the Danish Parliament has issued a damning criticism of the climate debate, saying politicians gullibly turn theories into facts.
Quote:
“You should say that although we believed in our models, that the temperature would rise from 1998 to 2008, we have to admit that it has not risen. We cannot explain why it has not risen, but we believe we still have a problem. I’m just asking that people say what they actually know,” Pedersen tells DR.
Pedersen says that a major challenge is how to ensure energy and food to cater for the major population growth the world will be experiencing, and that the COP15 Climate Summit could result in an agreement that reduces the pressure on the Earth.
Nothing to disagree with. The process might be flawed (in this one case), but not the science involved, nor the theory it supports.
(kind of surprised you posted it, i thought about looking for it online when i watched it on the National)
how about you pick one specific point of the science that is “settled” and make the case and lets see just how settled it is?
Is that your interpretation of what he was saying? OMfG, is there no end to the spin.
If they have been fudging the data (see my previous post on ONE example) and now can't produce the original, raw data, the science and the theory are in the crapper.
If the result can't be reproduced (which is what science is all about), then the theory is false.
It never even made the theory stage.
They never had evidence that supported their hypothesis as their experiments kept producing divergence that they could not explain. So rather than revising their hypothesis, they simply threw out or manipulated their experiments to fall in line with their hypothesis essentially manufacturing their theory.
Models can not be used to establish a theory as they are untestable and simply conjecture. This is a problem application based physics has with theoretical physics and there is division even in that field concerning what is "fact" and what is simply a sound speculation.
Heck, the climate science didn't even reach "sound speculation" as they could not even get their models to deal with divergence without "making it up".
Personally, I blame our dreadful education system (even university level). Have you seen some of the texts even in the science departments? It is disgusting how much this shoddy political approach to science has manipulated the process.
We are missing are resident AGW fanatics, have you noticed?
What's Up With That?
They're being their true liberal selves and dogging Glenn Beck for his Christmas Sweater play which is meant to enlighten people who may feel that they are helpless and hopeless. Don't they constantly get on the roof tops and scream to the top of their lungs that the liberals are the only ones that care about people? Sorry, off topic.....
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.
