Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

Sponsor

To: sm1th who wrote (15928)	5/3/2012 12:12:20 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 44210

<<97% of a statistically meaningless sample - 79 climate scientists. Anyone who takes the result of such a small sample seriously is the true fool.>> As usual you have no understanding of what you speak. 79 carefully selected scientists would be considered plenty large enough of a sample population by statisticians.

To: sm1th who wrote (15928)	5/3/2012 5:33:18 PM
From: greenspirit	4 Recommendations Respond to of 44210

I've noticed a trend in the past decade. Whenever liberals feel the need to press their agenda, they pay a left wing pseudo-educational institutional to drum up a fake "study" and pretend it represents fact and science. The latest ridiculous claim that 97 or 99 percent of climate scientists support the Global Warming fraud tops the list. The bottom line is, just because something is called a "study" doesn't mean it comes close to the truth. Picking and choosing people from U.N. bodies to echo what you want the outcome to be, doesn't represent fact nor scientific analysis. What fact we do know is easy to understand. Fact: Every fear-mongering model predicting the rate and degree of temperature increase has been wrong. Let me say that again, every model predicting the rate and degree of temperature increase has been wrong. Often by a factor of ten! So, those on the extreme hard wingnut Al Gore left who want Americans to buy into the scare tactics and predictions of gloom and doom, should work on a model that represents reality. They can mock the cloud effect till infinity, however, not understand how clouds effect the global temperature is akin to not understanding photosynthesis when studying plant growth.