Search results

No Scott, he said "predict how two dice will fall." That's not at all the same things as what the sum of the two dice will be. That's just how you interpreted it, which was incorrect.

From the Wunderblog. Here's the figure which shows the comparison for air quality for this spring compared to last years fires. The conditions appear to be improving with changing wind patterns and increasing moisture. Let's hope conditions improve before the peak of the season later this year.

Of course it's not about saving the planet or environment. They'll exist long after the last human breath. It's about preserving conditions which are favourable to us and the ecological systems we depend on. I'll ask you the same thing I ask everyone who makes the claim "crappy science" to...

Half of an internet forum population...and it's not half that don't believe the cause, it's over half that are non-believers and unsure. Of those who do have an opinion, you non-believers still are behind. There's a reason that polls have answers split into more than one category.

Of course we don't, but the number is larger. Close to 65% of Canadians voted for someone besides the governing party.

Umm, yes I do. I never said anything about a correlation. For the last time you thick skulled moron, there is more to statistics than correlations. You seem to be having a hard time with that. Go ahead, try an academic search on Google, or Google a scientists name to get their CV, and look at...

Delicious irony isn't it?:lol:

Probably the arrogance of an ignorant fool. Get out from your straw man world. I've never once mentioned any correlation. That's your argument, which I explained already. Unlike you, some people (myself included) can debate the words and ideas of other posters. I don't have to make up things...

That very circumstance prompted a thread from me in this sub-forum. Some people on this site use the word theory (when discussing science) in the common usage, which in scientific terms is to hypothesize. A hypothesis only becomes a theory when there is substantial agreement in disciplines...

I'm asking you about the details, of which you are always scant, and when asked for them, are deflected with more of your $hit. You said you liked it because the guy thinks like you. Hello confirmation bias. You can't even understand how a +/- 100°C accuracy is really a 200°C range, when the...

SF, here's a few fairly simple question for you, since the back and forth quoting is just basically spinning tires. What did you like best about Pat Frank's article? Anything in particular? What details, if there were any, left you with some feeling of disagreement? I think the answers to these...

No, you're wrong. You just live in a fantasy world. I know probability very well. What is your fascination with correlations? The depth of your statistical knowledge appears to be as profound as your understanding of logic and climate science for that matter. You're deeply ignorant about...

This was not formalized debate, you thought wrong. I guess I have my answer... Maybe because your evidence is without reference or citation? Just because you or I say something doesn't make it a fact. The odds that you understand that is about 1 in 36 trillion. How can I argue against...

Nothing like a friendly debate. How about you meet me in the Articles and Debates section for more formalized debate? We could ask some members to be the judges panel, or maybe the moderators would be up for it. If you think you're up for it, we can discuss what the parameters of the debate...

That last sentence is what gives me difficulty. You have not yet shown that to be true, while many, many people from various academic backgrounds have. I've read an awful lot about this, I learn the principles that back it up every day at school. It doesn't make me a climatologist, but I can...

No I understand, you're delusional! :-P I haven't dodged a thing. Obviously...or you'd know how wrong you are. Nope. Better to keep my money in my pocket. It began before the early 90's. It's only been since the 90's that more people have become aware of the issue. It's not revisionist...

What's lazy? I've already dealt with your drivel, as well as others like Juan and Zzarchov have. But I can go through your crap again, that which I haven't responded to. Well, we already have dealt with the other planets. Unfortunately for your weak argument, the theory behind GW is not...

So, there is this huge poplar tree in my father's neighbour's yard. Half of the tree hangs over Dad's house, and he's worried that some of these storms that blow through Southern Alberta might break some of the larger limbs off, and then fall onto his roof. Now, the house next door sits vacant...

Why don't you tell me what's bogus then, oh soothsayer.:roll: You repeat the talking points well enough, though that doesn't mean you actually know anything. What papers have you read? I'm not trying to save the world, I just have a urge to reply when I read the same tripe printed over and...

See, it's things like that which trouble me. One study comes out, which is essentially a confirmation of bias when people begin to brandy it about without even beginning to understand what the study says, or what the study did. If you want to see some of my problems with it, you can go to the...