Not at all like I said I can only go by what I trust as a truthful source(s). To me it seems overwhelmingly so, if you choose to believe otherwise good for you.
It isn't what I *believe*, newf. Science is NOT done by consensus or vote. Period. Not my belief, but how science is done.
OH, geez, newf, IT'S NOT WHAT I KNOW, IT'S HOW SCIENCE IS DONE.
It seems you don't know how it is done then because scientific procedures are being followed in the research and dissemination of Climate Change studies. Hence the studies, papers, reports and peer review. How is it done where you come from?
IP: Logged
12:07 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
It seems you don't know how it is done then because scientific procedures are being followed in the research and dissemination of Climate Change studies. Hence the studies, papers, reports and peer review. How is it done where you come from?
Scientists check each other's work. But that does not equal consensus or majority vote. All it takes is one scientist to make a theory, and one other to verify or replicate the results. It doesn't matter how many *agree*, whether it is one or 10,000, the additional scientists do not add any more weight to the proof.
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 11-21-2010).]
Scientists check each other's work. But that does not equal consensus or majority vote. All it takes is one scientist to make a theory, and one other to verify or replicate the results. It doesn't matter how many *agree*, whether it is one or 10,000, the additional scientists do not add any more weight to the proof.
The scientific community consists of the total body of scientists, its relationships and interactions.
The majority of climate scientists agree that global warming is primarily caused by human activities such as fossil fuel burning and deforestation.[2][3][4][5] The conclusion that global warming is mainly caused by human activity and will continue if greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced has been endorsed by more than 75 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences,[13] the American Association for the Advancement of Science,[14] the American Meteorological Society,[15] the International Union for Quaternary Research,[16] and the Joint Science Academies of the major industrialized and developing nations[17][18] explicitly use the word "consensus" when referring to this conclusion.
However, consensus is not unanimous, for example: at least one of the scientists asked to review and comment on the IPCC papers does not agree that humans are responsible for climate change.
Check out peer reviewed also.
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 11-21-2010).]
IP: Logged
12:22 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
The correct way of science to take the data and create a hypothesis. No create a hypothesis, then create the data. This is what Fiero bear is trying to get at. Apparently you don't seem to understand that their trying to fit a square peg in a round hole by fudging data to fit theory.
if "all" the scientist agree on something, what the hell does that matter when half of them are dishonest anyway? Thats like having a jury of crooks decide the verdict on fellow crook.
The correct way of science to take the data and create a hypothesis. No create a hypothesis, then create the data. This is what Fiero bear is trying to get at. Apparently you don't seem to understand that their trying to fit a square peg in a round hole by fudging data to fit theory.
if "all" the scientist agree on something, what the hell does that matter when half of them are dishonest anyway? Thats like having a jury of crooks decide the verdict on fellow crook.
Purely your opinion. I've shown many times how these "fudged" numbers have been dealt with by independent sources but you can choose not to believe it, doesn't bother me in the least. What bugs me is you are attempting to tell me that I don't seem to understand something because I don't believe the same things or have the same opinion on the subject as you. All you experts sure seem to "know" a lot more than people that spend their days studying this stuff full time, or maybe you don't and just believe it's a massive conspiracy to steal your money. I can't remember which one it is anymore.
IP: Logged
03:19 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Purely your opinion. I've shown many times how these "fudged" numbers have been dealt with by independent sources but you can choose not to believe it, doesn't bother me in the least. What bugs me is you are attempting to tell me that I don't seem to understand something because I don't believe the same things or have the same opinion on the subject as you. All you experts sure seem to "know" a lot more than people that spend their days studying this stuff full time, or maybe you don't and just believe it's a massive conspiracy to steal your money. I can't remember which one it is anymore.
He's not even listening to us. I'm done with him here.
Purely your opinion. I've shown many times how these "fudged" numbers have been dealt with by independent sources but you can choose not to believe it, doesn't bother me in the least. What bugs me is you are attempting to tell me that I don't seem to understand something because I don't believe the same things or have the same opinion on the subject as you. All you experts sure seem to "know" a lot more than people that spend their days studying this stuff full time, or maybe you don't and just believe it's a massive conspiracy to steal your money. I can't remember which one it is anymore.
I don't need a liberal Canadian telling me how these BS groups aren't stealing my money. Do you pay the taxes here in the USA that are being siphoned into all these special interest groups? Do you realize the ramifications of Cap and Trade? It will directly effect your nation as it will destroy our economy.
Considering we pay more money then any other nation on earth in BS projects like global warming and including humanitarian aid, I would much rather us focus on the aid then continue this BS science.
As far as first you collect the data, then go where the data leads you to form a hypothesis, this is basic sound science. If you think this is just an opinion, thats pretty sad. Science use to have ethics and ground rules for research. Apparently that means nothing anymore. Now, they just form an idea, and spend money trying to prove the idea even though the data leads else where. Reminds me of Darwinism. Despite the massive holes and missing links, they continue to push this theory as fact.
Nick you are 100% on the money. Fortunately for Canada we have a Conservative (Northern Republican) government that has been stalling this cap and trade nonsense. Our Senate with its Conservative majority just defeated a climate change bill put forward by the Liberals and Socialists that would have effectively stalled the Canadian economy.
With any luck, your Republicans in Congress can kill Cap and Trade forever.
Nick you are 100% on the money. Fortunately for Canada we have a Conservative (Northern Republican) government that has been stalling this cap and trade nonsense. Our Senate with its Conservative majority just defeated a climate change bill put forward by the Liberals and Socialists that would have effectively stalled the Canadian economy.
With any luck, your Republicans in Congress can kill Cap and Trade forever.
