Ninety miles from the South Eastern tip of the United States, Liberty has no stead. In order for Liberty to exist and thrive, Tyranny must be identified, recognized, confronted and extinguished.
#7 - Rather heavy focus on the well-being of current economic practices, with only a comparative handful of the 1,609 signatories being climate scientists.
Seeing as they fail to cite and quote the data and findings from published research gathered from the models they claim to be "immature", I would like to see their "self-critical science" that defies the numerous real world implications and present realities of accelerated climate change currently attributed to human activity.
Beyond this, their arguments are framed with generalities and assumptions, again without citation of specific studies to support their bold claims.
Not sure this is anything to take seriously aside from the harm it could do when spread to groups ill-equipped to properly dissect academic literature.
My father retired as a statistician for the EPA. One aspect of his job was to review the methodologies the environmental scientists were going to use to determine if the results would be statistically sound. Almost without fail, he would offer corrections to their approach and the environmentalists would say "well, we've already gone this far down our path..." and would ignore his advice. They would perform experiments that were statistically meaningless and the slap a "US EPA study says" on the conclusions.
My dad was convinced that man made global warming was bullshit and none of the studies finding otherwise were sound from a statistical analysis perspective.
4 comments:
#7 - Rather heavy focus on the well-being of current economic practices, with only a comparative handful of the 1,609 signatories being climate scientists.
Seeing as they fail to cite and quote the data and findings from published research gathered from the models they claim to be "immature", I would like to see their "self-critical science" that defies the numerous real world implications and present realities of accelerated climate change currently attributed to human activity.
Beyond this, their arguments are framed with generalities and assumptions, again without citation of specific studies to support their bold claims.
Not sure this is anything to take seriously aside from the harm it could do when spread to groups ill-equipped to properly dissect academic literature.
Did you know, using the all knowing magic box and a bit of sluething, you yourself could find all the information you infer to desire.
Start with Tony Heller at Real Climate Science, or Steve Goddard.
Tony Heller has all of the data, graphs and histories in plain easy to understand language. One needs to go no further.
My father retired as a statistician for the EPA. One aspect of his job was to review the methodologies the environmental scientists were going to use to determine if the results would be statistically sound. Almost without fail, he would offer corrections to their approach and the environmentalists would say "well, we've already gone this far down our path..." and would ignore his advice. They would perform experiments that were statistically meaningless and the slap a "US EPA study says" on the conclusions.
My dad was convinced that man made global warming was bullshit and none of the studies finding otherwise were sound from a statistical analysis perspective.
Post a Comment