Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
dark4181

31,000 (and counting)

32 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Now those 31,000 scientists have signed a petition.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...al-warming.html

I won't be giving up anything I own, so that a bunch of nut jobs can practice a cultish "save the planet" effort. My home is powered by a dam 120 miles north of me. Water works perfectly fine, thank you very much. And if anyone tries to prevent me from smoking, then they will have to go through my SKS first.

Did you know that in Belmont, a town just north of mine, they have completely banned anyone from smoking outside, in a car, or in an apartment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Did you know that in Belmont, a town just north of mine, they have completely banned anyone from smoking outside, in a car, or in an apartment?

 

Good, I'd rather not increase my risk of cancer just by standing next to you.

 

It has been pointed out in a previous post that only a tiny minority of the scientists that signed it are actual climatologists. Mathematicians haven't studied the climate much, you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, three people picked out "at random" completely debunk the entire idea.

 

I'm not saying this to be a butt, but you guys have only looked at three people and certainly not at random (face facts--it was intentionally done to try and debunk). That's not even 1% of the population that signed onto this and those results can hardly be called valid. It isn't even argument worthy as much as it is mudslinging.

 

Again, I'd love to see a reduction in cruddy stuff going into the environment. The way of extremism and mudslinging isn't the way to go about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good, I'd rather not increase my risk of cancer just by standing next to you.It has been pointed out in a previous post that only a tiny minority of the scientists that signed it are actual climatologists. Mathematicians haven't studied the climate much, you know.
Maybe someone will put theirs out in your eye.
Did you know that in Belmont, a town just north of mine, they have completely banned anyone from smoking outside, in a car, or in an apartment?
I'm not surprised, facsism is spreading since Bush took power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There was a global move to remove chlorofluorocarbons, and now they are banned in every country except for medical use.

 

I wish, my albuterol inhaler got changed from CFC to HFA because of this ban. HFA doesn't even work as well as CFC when it comes to an inhaler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not even 1% of the population that signed onto this and those results can hardly be called valid.

 

See: http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/...Of_Signers.html

 

According to the petition's own breakdown, only 3,697 of the 31,000 have degrees related to "Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment". Now, exactly how many of those 3,697 are truly up-to-speed enough to be considered "peers" in the field? How exactly do you quantify that? Only 40 are listed in Climatology... should we just use that number? Should we start to argue about more? How many More? Why? Are you really qualified to make that judgment? Can anyone accurately make that judgment with the data supplied in the petition? How so? Are you willing to call each of the 31,000 to interview them? Are you qualified to interview them? Who will create the interview call talk-sheet? Who's going to fund the out-bound call center?

 

Think it through and you should be able to come to the conclusion that the petition gives us very little meaningful data. It lets us know that there are skeptics with a degree in a science who are willing to sign a petition -- but we have no real way of knowing how many of the signatories opinions really matter on the subject. Even worse, some the data could be up to 10 years out-of-date. What exactly is the net gain?

 

My point here is not to debunk any global warming skeptics. I'm simply trying to point out that this petition does little to reinforce the skeptics point of view.

 

Petitions tell us nothing in scientific review. Well articulated rebuttals with references do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×