The IPCC consensus on climate change was phoney, says IPCC insider
-
National Post[^] The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony. The UN piece of fucking shit "scientists" need to be thrown in prison. The United States needs to get the hell out of the UN and prosecute the criminals in the UN.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Without a careful explanation about what it means, this drive for consensus can leave the IPCC vulnerable to outside criticism. Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading 11 scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous. That particular consensus judgement, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields. -- From the actual article being spun In other words, a few dozen of those 2500 are experts in that particular field. The rest are experts in OTHER fields, though it doesn't say here whether they're related fields. Who else do we know that relies on people in completely unrelated fields to make scientific statements, just because they have a PhD of some sort? Gee, I bet I could search the history of this forum and grab a few examples.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
National Post[^] The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony. The UN piece of fucking shit "scientists" need to be thrown in prison. The United States needs to get the hell out of the UN and prosecute the criminals in the UN.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
How amusing. You post one story, get shown to be completely ignorant and stupid, so you stop responding and go search for another poorly written and researched article that supports your world view so you can post that as if the last one never happened. Your life is pathetic.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
National Post[^] The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony. The UN piece of fucking shit "scientists" need to be thrown in prison. The United States needs to get the hell out of the UN and prosecute the criminals in the UN.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Truly we need help Illuminati controls scientific pawns
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
-
Truly we need help Illuminati controls scientific pawns
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
That is superb. More effort than he deserves.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Truly we need help Illuminati controls scientific pawns
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
:thumbsup:
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
National Post[^] The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony. The UN piece of fucking shit "scientists" need to be thrown in prison. The United States needs to get the hell out of the UN and prosecute the criminals in the UN.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Why don't you do some independent research of your own rather than taking as gospel the words of some mouth peace article. If you can be bothered to take the trouble to download AND read this 22 page PDF you might surprise yourself on what you might learn. [quote from Mike Hulme's website] This review article – Hulme & Mahony, 2010 - is to be published later in the summer in the journal Progress in Physical Geography. The article surveys all of the significant published research from the early 1990s onwards about how the IPCC works and what impacts its knowledge assessments have had. [/quote] http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Hulme-Mahony-PiPG.pdf[^]
-
Why don't you do some independent research of your own rather than taking as gospel the words of some mouth peace article. If you can be bothered to take the trouble to download AND read this 22 page PDF you might surprise yourself on what you might learn. [quote from Mike Hulme's website] This review article – Hulme & Mahony, 2010 - is to be published later in the summer in the journal Progress in Physical Geography. The article surveys all of the significant published research from the early 1990s onwards about how the IPCC works and what impacts its knowledge assessments have had. [/quote] http://mikehulme.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Hulme-Mahony-PiPG.pdf[^]
I've done my research, and all I want is for them to be punished.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
I've done my research, and all I want is for them to be punished.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Yep, and pigs fly!
If you mean your wife on an airliner...
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Yep, and pigs fly!
If you mean your wife on an airliner...
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Youtube and Wikipedia do not count as research. Quoting from peer reviewed academic works, or published results of empirical experimentation do, so, where did you publish, or what are you quoting as sources. Or have you never proceeded into the wider academic world beyond Pizza College?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
Youtube and Wikipedia do not count as research. Quoting from peer reviewed academic works, or published results of empirical experimentation do, so, where did you publish, or what are you quoting as sources. Or have you never proceeded into the wider academic world beyond Pizza College?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Dalek Dave wrote:
Quoting from peer reviewed academic works, or published results of empirical experimentation do
No, it does not.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
Quoting from peer reviewed academic works, or published results of empirical experimentation do
No, it does not.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
So, stuff written by people who know what they're talking about does not count, but stuff shot on shaky you-tube video, does ? You are so stupid.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
So, stuff written by people who know what they're talking about does not count, but stuff shot on shaky you-tube video, does ? You are so stupid.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
So, stuff written by people who know what they're talking about does not count
Stuff from the IPCC doesn't count.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Christian Graus wrote:
So, stuff written by people who know what they're talking about does not count
Stuff from the IPCC doesn't count.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Not to morons, no. Who cares what they know, how they spent their life studying, watching youtube makes you smart and being part of the IPCC makes you dumb, right ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Yep, and pigs fly!
If you mean your wife on an airliner...
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
YouTube, Answers.com, Wikipedia and mouth piece opinionated articles are rejected by ALL academic institutes as they are not a valid source of authority. [quote] When you reference correctly you are demonstrating that you have read widely on a topic. You are also supporting your hypothesis with comments from expert authors. This lends credibility to your own work. Also, by correctly referencing, you allow the marker or reader to follow-up your references and to check the validity of your arguments for themselves. [/quote] http://education.exeter.ac.uk/dll/studyskills/harvard_referencing.htm[^]
-
Truly we need help Illuminati controls scientific pawns
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
Thats it! im doning my tin foil hat.. off to the supermarket to stock up on water, mars bars and toilet paper. and then going to build a radiation shelter in my cellar with the doors from my house ! thank god i watched all those movies as a kid! IM SAFE :laugh: :laugh:
Marc Clifton wrote:
That has nothing to do with VB. - Oh crap. I just defended VB!
-
YouTube, Answers.com, Wikipedia and mouth piece opinionated articles are rejected by ALL academic institutes as they are not a valid source of authority. [quote] When you reference correctly you are demonstrating that you have read widely on a topic. You are also supporting your hypothesis with comments from expert authors. This lends credibility to your own work. Also, by correctly referencing, you allow the marker or reader to follow-up your references and to check the validity of your arguments for themselves. [/quote] http://education.exeter.ac.uk/dll/studyskills/harvard_referencing.htm[^]
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
YouTube, Answers.com, Wikipedia and mouth piece opinionated articles are rejected by ALL academic institutes as they are not a valid source of authority.
Unless of course it's the IPCC, they don't even do research, they just make shit up.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
YouTube, Answers.com, Wikipedia and mouth piece opinionated articles are rejected by ALL academic institutes as they are not a valid source of authority.
Unless of course it's the IPCC, they don't even do research, they just make shit up.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Unless of course it's the IPCC
Including them. They have made errors, but none like you do.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
they don't even do research, they just make sh*t up.
That must be the All American Alex Jones you are talking about who you are most happy to associate with.
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
YouTube, Answers.com, Wikipedia and mouth piece opinionated articles are rejected by ALL academic institutes as they are not a valid source of authority.
Unless of course it's the IPCC, they don't even do research, they just make shit up.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
You can repeat your fantasies as often as you like, it won't make it true. Scientists live in the real world, where mistakes are made and corrected. Your fantasy world is more black and white than that, but it is not real.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Unless of course it's the IPCC
Including them. They have made errors, but none like you do.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
they don't even do research, they just make sh*t up.
That must be the All American Alex Jones you are talking about who you are most happy to associate with.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
They have made errors, but none like you do.
Exactly.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]