Yes, which I've cited.You have yet to make any data what so ever why the IPCC report did not overstate its case. It did, after all, predict increasing temps which have not in fact occurred. LOL. Science is not conducted by linking to one or two popular press articles and a couple of one's own posts on an internet discussion board, then declaring success. That's what the right wants to believe when it comes to evolution and global warming and a few other topics. Actual scientific investigations involve researchers reading thousands of pages of peer-reviewed literature, spending months or years taking meticulous measurements, applying existing models and developing new ones, then discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the models examined to describe the observations. The researchers who engage in this kind of intense, focused work typically have studied research formally for many years. Most will have earned or will be earning a PhD and many will have done post-doc work.Even with that kind of effort by those kinds of people, no scientific model is ever 100% correct. Models will never be perfect, but the procedure makes them improve over time.People who like to quote popular science articles or focus on one graph or one prediction from among the thousands of pages of literature, then declare they have found the smoking gun that proves scientists are wrong are not uncommon. Often these people have a technical degree - maybe a Masters degree - but either did not want to put in the effort or were unable to earn their PhD. I saw them a lot when I taught. They often have a giant chip on their shoulder and an arrogant attitude. Very few global warming doubters are motivated by a desire to expand knowledge. Their motivation is purely political. They scour the popular scientific literature in search of tidbits to prove their point - ignoring the mountains of facts that support the prevailing theory and then attempt to intimidate the lay public with their data artifact while demonizing the actual scientists who have devoted so much of their lives to actually trying to expand knowledge.If you really believe that you know more about scientific rigor and global warming than 90+% of the scientific community, then you should prove it by developing your arguments into a better model or theory and publishing it. Otherwise, stop pretending that a handful of arrogant assertions from unqualified people in non-peer reviewed publications even comes close to overturning the existing dominant understanding of the scientific community.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar