- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nearly ALL current global warming is fabricated: peer reviewed study finds
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:29 am to Errerrerrwere
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:29 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:Actually the point is well taken.
Winkfacw couldn't find anything on one of the authors.
However, facts are facts regardless of who rolls them out. Manipulated data is manipulated data regardless of how many academic degrees one can claim.
3
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:32 am to NC_Tigah
I could care less if two doctors wrote the paper with the help of someone with a Master's degree.
It wouldn't be the other way around, I'm sure.
But the data is always manipulated. Always manipulated upward. And had the data not constantly be manipulated and adjusted; we'd be well past this shite by now.
It wouldn't be the other way around, I'm sure.
But the data is always manipulated. Always manipulated upward. And had the data not constantly be manipulated and adjusted; we'd be well past this shite by now.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:33 am to Winkface
quote:You can want more, but in this climate getting more is highly unlikely. You need only look as far as derisive comments targeting these authors, grants being used as backing for such derision, an the disproportionate money tied into AGW Promotion to understand why.
Or Winkface wants more studies
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:34 am to Winkface
quote:
Or Winkface wants more studies, more review from real statisticians and experts. This paper? Yeah, you can pack it up.
Yeah. That's going to do anything. MOAR MONEY!
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:35 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:You deceptively presented it as a peer-reviewed manuscript. Then when others pointed out it wasn't actually peer-reviewed, you pivoted to their credentials and used it to create a strawman argument against those who were merely pointing out of wasn't peer-reviewed.
Yeah. Well that's settles it. Winkfacw couldn't find any lthing on one oft the authors.
Now winkface is questioning the credentials argument, and now you're pivoting to a new strawman with your "pack up and go home" nonsense.
Lately you seem to content on insulting anyone who disagrees with your perspective, and fall back into the comfort of the echo chamber knowing that most people agree with you on here. Multiple people have engaged with you in a reasonable manner, and even one largely agreed with you (Bristol Dawg) and instead you've responded with posts largely comprised of you mocking and insulting the poster.
You've become a less irrational and somewhat nicer version of KCT and cptbengal.
This post was edited on 7/10/17 at 11:38 am
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:35 am to NC_Tigah
quote:If they're selling this slop as "peer-reviewed" and exaggerating their credentials such comments are richly deserved.
You need only look as far as derisive comments targeting these authors
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:35 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Yeah. That's going to do anything. MOAR MONEY!
The only thing wrong with this is that it's tax money.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:38 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:So you're saying you do care.
I could care less if two doctors wrote the paper with the help of someone with a Master's degree.
This isn't a case of the Masters staff writing the paper and the PhD taking the credit. The supposed "Dr." isn't a Dr. at all.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:39 am to Winkface
Prove it.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:40 am to Winkface
I don't see what's so hard about understanding that TWO doctors and whatever else you think he is, wrote the paper?
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:40 am to Errerrerrwere
Peer reviewed means little to nothing nowadays. Just confirmation among others who believe the same crap and are doing similar studies themselves
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:41 am to texag7
Another good point, Tex. It has gone to shite in today's world. Especially as it relates to AGW.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:41 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Manipulated data is manipulated data regardless of how many academic degrees one can claim.
The author admits that the adjustments are needed in the paper, but because he does not like what the data looks like after the adjustments, he considers them invalid
He never attacks the actual methods of the adjustments or the validity of them, just the results
I just read that entire paper and it is quite laughable
Why do you supposed they ignore the ocean temperatures in their paper?
This post was edited on 7/10/17 at 11:42 am
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:42 am to Salmon
quote:
The author admits that the adjustments are needed in the paper, but because he does not like what the data looks like after the adjustments, he considers them invalid
Wrong!
He's saying that there is no way, Statistically, that they can always be adjusted UPWARD!
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:43 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:Which is a false premise because ocean data is adjusted down.
He's saying that there is no way, Statistically, that they can always be adjusted UPWARD!
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:43 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
He's saying that there is no way, Statistically, that they can always be adjusted UPWARD!
They aren't.
Which is why he ignores the ocean data, I suppose.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:43 am to Salmon
But they are. Quit being dense.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:44 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
The study was done by two scientists and a statistician. The study was THEN peer reviewed.
Reading comprehension is a bitch.
Reviewed by, and published in, which journal?
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:45 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
But they are. Quit being dense.
Posted on 7/10/17 at 11:45 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
But they are. Quit being dense.
What?
Page 4 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News