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.
My academic qualifications and professional background isn't in any of earth sciences fields. But I'm not the one claiming 'expertise' in all the earth sciences fields involved in climate science like you and Hawkeye.
Neither he, nor I, do. Data, I know. Rd, I know. Medicine, especially neurology, he knows.
He's just posing questions to others who proclaim science without the credentials to know, just repeat.
Try citing some of the 'sources' you usually provide as references for a paper and try to get it published.
Conspiracy blogs and forum posts by laypeople, fake charts by Biblical nutters with no qualifications in any field of science who claim they can predict the climate using the Bible, junkscience blogs like NaturalNews, junkscience websites like Principia Scientific International - A science-based community - Sky Dragon Slayer cultists who claim the earth's natural greenhouse effect "violates the second law of thermodynamics", trashy tabloid press articles by journalists etc etc. You take garbage from all these junk non-science sources and "accept it a gospel truth", then preach it on this forum. Your posts certainly generate hoots of laughter.
But STILL, you have not yet posted even ONE published Journal article that has supported your nonsense assertions.
I haven't forgotten that you didn't even know how to do an online search and download an old article from JAMA that you claimed supported your assertion about doctors views on tobacco, while I was able to search for and download half a dozen old articles from JAMA and NEJM that refuted your claims in less than 30 minutes? You can't even access articles from medical Journals online let alone all the science Journals. Did you forget the ridiculous excuse you invented about waiting for "Yolanda the archivist" to send you a copy of a paper by fax? Seriously?
You mean American Thinker, C02 Scam and Wikipedia aren't considered reputable scientific links, where is that Yolanda
My academic qualifications and professional background isn't in any of the earth sciences fields. But I'm not the one claiming more 'expertise' in all the earth sciences fields involved in climate science than all the scientists who are experts in those fields, like you and Hawkeye are doing.
Cesit is on an "ethics committee". I personally found those on "ethics committees" to be non-science oriented pests, usually with some bullcrap degree is sociology or some other waste. "Ethics committees" are usually barriers to science, as they place odd, unusual demands on valid, scientific study.
He/She has no advanced scientific degrees, no training in science, no publications, has never edited papers for the literature. Sadly, he/she is perpetrating a fraud by suggesting any formal training, as he has none.
Yet he claims to be an expert in science.
This is how this scam is perpetuted- pseudoscience propagated by pseudoscientists.
So what are Ceist's credentials ? ZERO, NADA, NOTHING. This is what we call the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" in which those with the least credentials and training claim false superlative expertise.
Neither he, nor I, do. Data, I know. Rd, I know. Medicine, especially neurology, he knows.
He's just posing questions to others who proclaim science without the credentials to know, just repeat.
That is easy.
No, he is not 'just posing questions'. And neither are you. He's appealing to a false authority - himself. As are you. He has no 'expertise' (or even a basic high-school level knowledge) in any earth sciences/ climate science fields- that's damned obvious. Even his 'questions' reveal that.
He makes a lot of ignorant, evidence-free, long refuted pseudoscience assertions that he unthinkingly parrots from 'sources' like conspiracy blogs, junk-science websites and press pieces by laypeople journalists, not published research (or even grade-school textbooks for that matter).
Apart from all those parroted assertions, claiming that global warming is a 'hoax' when every major science academy and institution worldwide accepts the strong consilience of evidence from many different independent lines of investigation (which he and you appear completely oblivious to), is just irrational ignorant ideological ranting.
Not really any different to a creationist ranting that the theory of evolution is hoax because it contradicts their religious beliefs. They also completely ignore science and only parrot junk non-science sources like he does. Do you seriously think anyone should take him seriously on this topic as the 'expert' that he falsely claims to be? LOL!
Cesit is on an "ethics committee". I personally found those on "ethics committees" to be non-science oriented pests, usually with some bullcrap degree is sociology or some other waste. "Ethics committees" are usually barriers to science, as they place odd, unusual demands on valid, scientific study.
He/She has no advanced scientific degrees, no training in science, no publications, has never edited papers for the literature. Sadly, he/she is perpetrating a fraud by suggesting any formal training, as he has none.
Yet he claims to be an expert in science.
This is how this scam is perpetuted- pseudoscience propagated by pseudoscientists.
So what are Ceist's credentials ? ZERO, NADA, NOTHING. This is what we call the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" in which those with the least credentials and training claim false superlative expertise.
You really have no clue about me or my academic qualifications, background or profession as I have never posted anything about it, so as usual you just make stuff up and lie. Nor have I ever claimed any expertise in earth sciences fields outside my own fields (unlike you). I defer to those who are published experts in their own fields. But all your posts on this topic are pretty much ignorant evidence-free assertions, pseudoscience, junk non-science sources, lies, childish insults, and endless delusional narcissistic banging on about how you're the 'expert' on everything, so no surprise.
I'm still waiting for you to post even ONE published Journal article that supports your nonsense assertions. It's only been about 6 years since I first asked you. Are you still waiting for the fairy tale 'Yolanda' to 'fax' you an article? You STILL don't even know how to search the literature using online Journal databases or have online access to science Journals?
Scroll back in this, or similar threads. Those you are complimenting have used nasa and noaa, then dismissed nasa and NOAA when it didn't support.
False evidence-free assertion (aka a lie)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stymie13
Consistency is great. Too bad many on both sides aren't
Sides? You mean the 'side' of science and evidence, versus the non-science, evidence-free conspiracy/pseudoscience, ideological ranting, 'side'? It's more and more clear which 'side' you're on.
There is one immutable fact (not theory); the earth heats and cools periodically.
It also heats due to CO2 emissions.
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.
