Oh I cant be bothered anymore
-
fat_boy wrote:
You fail to notice the discrepency between the actual report and what is stated in the media outlets.
You should see what the media does with respect to reporting health issues. It's abysmal.
- F
Yeah, its crap. No sooner has a scientist voiced some concern over a particular food type for example and the media has turned it into a scare story. One thing that really pisses me off about the whole GW thing is the way the media has behaved, constantly, and probably intentionally, misquoting scientific sources. Like this one. The source says that northern hemisphere sea ice is decreasing, yet the media story states sea ice is decreasing. What also pisses me off is the way the AGW scientists dont seem to object to this loosesness with the truth. If they slammed down on the press for this kind of thing I would have a lot more respect for their integrity.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
:) Hmm, depends how much bile and vitriol I can accumulate over the nect few days. ;) Actually, and I mean this, when I discuss GW with other people, ie not not on CP, they actually understand what I am saying and see the validity of it. I dont know if forums are bad at communicaiton, or whether the annonyminity allows people to behave in ways they wouldnt personally, but I am gettig sick of the abuse people hurl at me just because I have an opinion and want to discuss it with others.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
What little I know of climatology suggests that it's not in the slightest bit simple. For you to suggest both that it is simpler than I know it to be and show greater confidence in your conclusions suggests to me that you lie further to the left on the Dunning-Kruger chart than I do.
James L. Thomson wrote:
What little I know of climatology suggests that it's not in the slightest bit simple
I quite agree. The climate system would appear to be immensely complex, and poorly understood, see my IPCC link. But, beyond what happens in the system if it can be shown that the system doesnt respond the way a theory predicts then that theory is largely wrong. This is the very basics of science. So we havent seen the temperature response to CO2 that was predicted, which implies the theory of AGW is either wrong, or its effect overstated. Its that simple.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Yes. Will you now join me in my holy scientific war on religion? Just for the lulz of course ;) It is best fought here in the backroom. I'm not sure why.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Will you now join me in my holy scientific war on religion? Just for the lulz of course
Perhaps this image will be useful? :) http://miscellanea.wellingtongrey.net/comics/2007-01-15-science-vs-faith.png[^]
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
