Russians Behind DNC attack!

[big_ole_jpn]

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Speak for yourself; I have a PhD from a top 5 institution worldwide in my field.

Anyway, I think I'm done with this thread. It's pretty boring to read 50 million appeals to authority.

You got the balls to share which field? Feels like a social science to me.

[Jarnauga]

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Speak for yourself; I have a PhD from a top 5 institution worldwide in my field.

Anyway, I think I'm done with this thread. It's pretty boring to read 50 million appeals to authority.

Yeah well i'm the poker world champion 7 years in a row, so my opinion on global warming is totally relevant

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Jarnauga [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Raev: 97% of the world scientists agree on human made global warming. 97% of people way smarter than you and me. Now i'm sure you think you're smarter than that, but let me tell you: you're not.

People still spout this myth? hahahaha!
What do I care about 79 selected "scientists" churning out a 97% consensus in accordance with their bring home the bacon peer-review papers?
What parallel universe do you come from where there are only 79 scientists in the "world"?

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

People still spout this myth? hahahaha!
What do I care about 79 selected "scientists" churning out a 97% consensus in accordance with their meat and potatoes peer-review papers?
What parallel universe do you come from where there are only 79 scientists in the "world"?

This is an important point and deserves quoting ^^

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is an important point and deserves quoting ^^

The "97 percent" figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make. WSJ: The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'


Also:

"Surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus. Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous."

There is lots published on the fake numbers, it's hard to miss. Most of those 3k polled had no clue about the field, most not even scientists, and the poll choices were rigged. We never get truth out of this administration, numbers are always manipulated if not just outright invented. The 40% is probably closer to the truth.

[Jarnauga]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

People still spout this myth? hahahaha!
What do I care about 79 selected "scientists" churning out a 97% consensus in accordance with their bring home the bacon peer-review papers?
What parallel universe do you come from where there are only 79 scientists in the "world"?

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...1/4/048002/pdf

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Damn that's a lot more than "79 selected scientists" is it..?

See ? i did all the work that you the free-thinking-no-bias-patriot should have done, and it took me 10 minutes. Granted that it's longer than going on infowars and reading a 200 words "article".

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Jarnauga [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Damn that's a lot more than "79 selected scientists" is it..?

See ? i did all the work that you the free-thinking-no-bias-patriot should have done, and it took me 10 minutes. Granted that it's longer than going on infowars and reading a 200 words "article".

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Daywolf]

You conveniently left out:

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

WSJ: The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'
[/URL]

Also:

"Surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus. Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous."

Originally Posted by Jarnauga [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[url]

Damn that's a lot more than "79 selected scientists" is it..?

See ? i did all the work that you the free-thinking-no-bias-patriot should have done, and it took me 10 minutes. Granted that it's longer than going on infowars and reading a 200 words "article".

If you and Lune note, that wasn't "infowars" I pulled that from, I sourced it moments before you replied and plenty of time for Lune to notice before his fail fail meme. And when have I EVER linked the infowars website into this forum? Never once, dumbass.

Yeah that's all a farce, a myth, they invented it. The American Meteorological Society doesn't even believe it, and the rest is all/mostly fabricated.

[Xaanka]

Originally Posted by Jarnauga [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...1/4/048002/pdf

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Damn that's a lot more than "79 selected scientists" is it..?

See ? i did all the work that you the free-thinking-no-bias-patriot should have done, and it took me 10 minutes. Granted that it's longer than going on infowars and reading a 200 words "article".

this post couldn't have done a better job of proving my point. because to imply this matters, shows an absolute lack of understanding or knowledge of the history of science to begin with. like seriously sit down for 5 minutes and watch the first couple episodes of cosmos or something if you're so opposed to reading a book. 99.999% of scientists used to believe the earth was flat and you would be treated like a kook and demonized for saying otherwise. this is pretty much how it always is, until someone proves something right/wrong. just look at how many early 1900's astronomers/geologists/etc were laughed out of their fields for proposing ideas which are considered proven fact today just 1 century later. even a "high school chemistry text book" history will make this more than just a little bit obvious.

nobody cares about real science because they want something easily digestable. here this guy is, posting about this topic when he's probably never opened a scientific journal and read a single study about global warming in his life. you're getting science news from fucking media outlets, do you not understand what a joke that is? when you read "scientists discover" on cnn do you ever bother to even go as deep as to read the abstract of the source they're citing, or looking into the previous credibility of the source? pseudointellectual scum.

you put your quasi-scientific political point up on a booby trapped pedestal and of course nobody's going to touch it. numbers like that only prove the effectiveness of these political tactics. credibility is money is influence in the scientific community and questioning something popular will end that for you quick, the way the current climate is surrounding certain topics.

this post brought to you by paranoid schizophrenic dilusions.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also Lune, I don't understand why you seem totally unable to grasp the simple concept that one cannot determine causal relationships by pure observation, as one can never rule out a hidden joint cause, but your mind seems only capable of generating a stream of irrelevant straw men and insults. Your coworkers must find you delightful.

If there's a simple concept to grasp, it's that you can accumulate strong evidence for causation with a combination of observational and experimental data.

For example, we accumulated enough evidence about the accumulation of lead in the environment to stop putting it on our fuel. If they had listened to people like you, we'd still be spewing lead everywhere because we were never able to actually experimentally verify that lead was actually navigating the complex pathway from gasoline additive to retarded children because there was no parallel universe to act as a control.

I do not insult unless insulted first or it's someone I do not respect. Given that your first words in this thread were disparaging my intelligence, it's a little hypocritical to whine about it.

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Anyway, I think I'm done with this thread. It's pretty boring to read 50 million appeals to authority.

I didn't appeal to authority until my third post, and only because you attacked the integrity and sincerity of that authority to try and weaken a scientific opinion. You can't assault an authority and then whine when I defend it. Everything you're accusing others of in this thread, you did in your very first post.