Search results

How about MERS! 8O Granted it's not quite as terrifying as hemorrhaging fluid from every orifice...

Hø̈ø̈ters Says Rape Joke On Its Facebook Page Wasn't Its Fault On Saturday, a rape joke showed up on Hø̈ø̈ters' official Facebook page. The restaurant chain said that it was the result of a hack, yet the photo isn't too far off from the kind of pictures the restaurant usually posts. The...

Seriously, are you drinking? This thread is one big hoopla over what climate science is, and so when someone points out that there are many interdisciplinary aspects besides your new found love of the phrase 'climate mechanics' you think that's all there is to AGW? I'm sure Tecumsehsbones...

So what? We've already established that answering some questions related to climate requires an interdisciplinary approach. And here it is from the National Academies of Science: Fostering Advances in Interdisciplinary Climate Science

Say it with me: in ter dis ci pli nar y

Say it with me: in ter dis ci pli nar y You keep the narrow focus if you like. It suits your style.

He's talking about a survey of petroleum and related industry experts in Alberta. What the ƒuck is up with Watts was plugging it last summer. You know, because it's not deceptive at all to split a demographic down to a subset and apply the results to the whole. PEI sure as hell isn't...

Well, maybe you should try clicking a few links on the Iowa State University program instead of asking others to tell you in multiple posts. If it's your fishing tactic, it really sucks. It took less than 5 seconds to find out how the work of the one psychologist listed on that research team...

Do you understand what an example is? And what's your preoccupation with psychologists? I'll admit I need to wake up when you can provide one published paper in the climate science sphere written by someone who defines their profession as a baker, or a cab driver, or a hockey player, or a stay...

I'm actually more partial to the 97% of published papers that support the anthropogenic cause of climate change than of the 97% of surveyed scientists. The 97% figure for published research is more appropriate. A scientist who has published 900 papers carries more weight than one who has...

Yes. You know, when a group of researchers from different fields combine approaches to work on a subject. What impact does climate change have on cold-water species? Could involve, marine biologists, zoologists, oceanographers, bio-statisticians, econometricians, pathologists, and ecologists...

Lots of 'Climate Science' programs: National Center for Atmospheric Research | RAL | Climate Science and Applications Program CSUN Climate Science Program: Home CREATE - NSERC Training Program in Climate Science Welcome - Climate Science and Solutions - Northern Arizona University Scripps-...

lol, that wasn't for you, that was in reply to the soda pop science fail from Derpy. No you don't, you don't even understand gas solubility laws.

The only part that isn't my own words is the references. Are you telling me that everything you've said on this subject comes from your own original thoughts? Bull. You asked what I go on, so I gave my answer and included where my answer comes from. You know, what the people studying this have...

See, that's your problem right there. You think it's all models despite words explicitly stating something else. The answer to Derpy included words like observations and satellite measurements and quantify. I refer specifically to observations, and somehow you read that and arrive at models...

You won't know until you read. I'm not here to provide you with guided reading. You asked, I gave you an answer. If you won't read it, then it's not really a discussion I'm interested in having.

Yeah, I was alive in the mid 1800s and have written under tens of different pseudonyms over the centuries. None, obviously. I already told you, there is no such thing. If you understood how science works you would know why that is a ridiculous question. The kind of anger that drives little...

I'm a scientist. There is always uncertainty. You've been told this before. Scientific advancements in knowledge don't stand still until something is known without doubt. I'll freely admit that the content that follows could be wrong. But someone has to show that to be true to change the story...

Because it's better to be joking about something than to be in a state of denial. It's called tongue in cheek. I have no idea why the site deniers need or want to carry on with irrelevant dialogue after the original story is shown to be bunk. Fully capable, it's you and your support group...

Are you kidding me? Your support group, you're all in denial. But that's typical for deniers. :lol: