20 Jun 19
@humy saidYou do not know what the experts say. Most of climate scientists need to be polled to know that and it has never been done.
Unlike you, no. I just look at what the science and the experts say.
@metal-brain saidfalse. I have read what they say.
You do not know what the experts say.
@metal-brain saidSo you think if, say, 10% of a large population was randomly selected and say 90% said yes to a question, you don't think that couldn't be good evidence that probably about 90% of the rest of the population would also say yes?
False. All polls were of a minority of climate scientists, not a majority.
As usual, you show complete ignorance of how statistics and science works.
20 Jun 19
@humy saidNo. A majority of a minority is still a minority. Only a minority of climate scientists have been polled and released. If a poll of a majority exists it was suppressed. I have never seen it and neither have you.
So you think if, say, 10% of a large population was randomly selected and say 90% said yes to a question, you don't think that couldn't be good evidence that probably about 90% of the rest of the population would also say yes?
As usual, you show complete ignorance of how statistics and science works.
Deepthought already did a good job of explaining to you why a poll of a minority could be flawed. Now you are pretending you do not remember.
24 Jun 19
1 edit
@metal-brain saidHere is an interesting article talking about inconsistencies in climate change modeling, a big problem for climate science but they think they have resolved the issue:
No. A majority of a minority is still a minority. Only a minority of climate scientists have been polled and released. If a poll of a majority exists it was suppressed. I have never seen it and neither have you.
Deepthought already did a good job of explaining to you why a poll of a minority could be flawed. Now you are pretending you do not remember.
https://phys.org/news/2019-06-evidence-reliability-climate.html
And this, about the melting of the Greenland ice sheet. Showing that cloud cover is more dominant in the melt than levels of CO2 or Methane:
https://phys.org/news/2019-06-clouds-dominate-uncertainties-future-greenland.html
11 Aug 19
Research shows the US military is one of the largest climate polluters in history, consuming more liquid fuels and emitting more CO2e (carbon-dioxide equivalent) than most countries.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190620100005.htm
If a carbon tax is proposed and the military is exempt from it you will know it is a scam.
11 Aug 19
@metal-brain saidI agree. I think gov'ts who are serious about it have started with their own programs. For example, upgrading the energy efficiency of government buildings reduce it's carbon footprint. Makes sense to make some simple changes. While we're still spending vast sums of money to build them (for some weird reason), we don't really use tanks anymore so that probably goes a long way to reducing emissions.
Research shows the US military is one of the largest climate polluters in history, consuming more liquid fuels and emitting more CO2e (carbon-dioxide equivalent) than most countries.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190620100005.htm
If a carbon tax is proposed and the military is exempt from it you will know it is a scam.
11 Aug 19
@Metal-Brain
And it would make ZERO difference to you if EVERY climate scientist stood up in one voice of alarmism, you would just go, nope, you are all wrong.
12 Aug 19
@sonhouse saidYou could get all climate scientists in one room? You have not even counted how many there are, let alone polled them all.
@Metal-Brain
And it would make ZERO difference to you if EVERY climate scientist stood up in one voice of alarmism, you would just go, nope, you are all wrong.
All you have to do is support a poll of the majority of climate scientists instead of a minority. Why don't you?
@Metal-Brain
Show us a poll or any type of evidence to indicate that most climate scientists probably don't think there is man made global warming.
If you cannot then you have no argument as all the most relevant evidence we have up to date indicates the contrary.
12 Aug 19
@humy saidShow us a study that takes a poll of a majority of climate scientists. If you cannot you only have a minority that agrees with you, not a majority.
@Metal-Brain
Show us a poll or any type of evidence to indicate that most climate scientists probably don't think there is man made global warming.
If you cannot then you have no argument as all the most relevant evidence we have up to date indicates the contrary.
Why don't you want a poll of the majority? If you are confident they will agree with you it just stands to reason that you would be all for it. What are you afraid of?
12 Aug 19
@metal-brain saidJust look at the literature that is published on the subject in peer-reviewed journals. It tells you everything you need to know about what the experts think.
Show us a study that takes a poll of a majority of climate scientists. If you cannot you only have a minority that agrees with you, not a majority.
Why don't you want a poll of the majority? If you are confident they will agree with you it just stands to reason that you would be all for it. What are you afraid of?
12 Aug 19
@wildgrass saidNo it doesn't. It tells you who gets the most funding, not what a majority of climate scientist's opinions are.
Just look at the literature that is published on the subject in peer-reviewed journals. It tells you everything you need to know about what the experts think.
Why don't you support a poll of the majority of climate scientists? What are you afraid of?
12 Aug 19
15 edits
@metal-brain saidYou evading my question only shows all of us here you have no answer; and we all know why. But I won't evade yours; We have been here before; I don't need to show such a poll because the way nearly all valid polls work is nearly always not to poll the majority of individuals within the target population (else that would usually make them totally impractical if not impossible) but to, randomly as is practical, poll some arbitrarily large number (say, 500) of individuals within of the target population so that there is an arbitrary high probably that the answers they give will reflect the opinions of the whole of the target population within some arbitrary margin of error (such as, say, correct within just 2% ).
Show us a study that takes a poll of a majority of climate scientists.
If you know the first thing about how statistical analysis works you would have already known this; unless you are just pretending to be completely ignorant and confused just to evade my question?
If you deny this and moronically insist the nonsense that one cannot know what the majority of climate scientists very likely think unless its a poll of the majority of individual climate scientists, then since no such poll exists or can exist, how do YOU know what the majority of climate scientists think? What is YOUR source of information that the majority of climate scientists do NOT think there is man made global warming?
-We all know why you will not answer.