Climate-gate

So why do people allow themselves to be 'alarmed' by those who apparently lack a basic grasp of statistics?
Click to expand...
Because they have powerful support and great political influence. They have done a lot of damage, and bid to do more. And you shill for them here.
 
@Billy T,

Lest I be accused of having an agenda, I'll post just one more quote from wiki,
"Until the early 1900s industrial hemp was a valuable crop used all over the world for its strong fibers and oil seeds. Today, however, the common perception of the industrial hemp plant is generally negative and associated with the drug marijuana. This perception is the legacy of a century of powerful influences constructing hemp as a dangerous drug, even though it is not a drug and it has the potential to be a profitable alternative crop. In the United States, the public's perception of hemp as marijuana has blocked hemp from becoming a useful crop and product,"[54] in spite of its vital importance prior to World War II.[55] Ideally, according to Britain's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the herb should be desiccated and harvested towards the end of flowering. This early cropping reduces the seed yield but improves the fiber yield and quality.[56] In these strains of industrial hemp the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content would have been very low.[54]
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp
 
Photizo said:
So why do people allow themselves to be 'alarmed' by those who apparently lack a basic grasp of statistics?
Click to expand...

Because most people are ignorant of the "exponential function" and how the statistics are presented.

example: which is worse; a "7% growth of oil consumption per year" or "a doubling of oil consumption every 10 years"?

p.s. the term "doubling" in this context means "more oil consumption than the total of all oil consumption in previous history"
 
Write4U said:
IMO, the answers lie in arithmetics.
Click to expand...

The question was
"So why do people allow themselves to be 'alarmed' ... "

You won't find an answer to that in arithmetic, pillow cases, fruit jars, dog barks, ice cream sundays, nor supposed discussions about climate.

People "allow themselves to be alarmed" because they need or want this emotional state, and that falls within the discipline of psychology.
 
sculptor said:
The question was
"So why do people allow themselves to be 'alarmed' ... "

You won't find an answer to that in arithmetic, pillow cases, fruit jars, dog barks, ice cream sundays, nor supposed discussions about climate.

People "allow themselves to be alarmed" because they need or want this emotional state, and that falls within the discipline of psychology.
Click to expand...

I am alarmed by the mathematics of the GW data. Any scientist who is not, needs psychological help, I'll grant you that.
 
Last edited:
Every experiment has variables which must needs be accounted for, even those that are mostly observational.
Do you honestly believe that all variables have been accounted for in a balanced and unbiased (scientific) manner?
 
Photizo said:
So why do people allow themselves to be 'alarmed' by those who apparently lack a basic grasp of statistics?
Click to expand...

I don't let people like you 'alarm' me. What alarms me is that people who don't know better might take arguments like yours seriously.
 
vanhelsing-350x261.jpg

So why do people allow themselves to be 'alarmed' by those who apparently lack a basic grasp of statistics?





DraculaLugosi.jpg

Trippy said:
I don't let people like you 'alarm' me. What alarms me is that people who don't know better might take arguments like yours seriously.
Click to expand...
 
Trippy said:
I don't let people like you 'alarm' me. What alarms me is that people who don't know better might take arguments like yours seriously.
Click to expand...

It's entirely possible that in their closed door strategy sessions before they launched some of their coordinated attacks on the science threads, they were grappling with the question of how to compete with the educational resources made available to their kids, who no doubt are questioning the parents' remarks at home that science is fundamentally broken. Anything that appears to a naive reader to be a legitimate argument against scientific evidence poses that very kind of harm you and I and every other reasonably informed person wants to nip in the bud.

I keep thinking of opening a thread which picks up where JamesR left off when he created his excellent thread on Pseudoscience a couple of years ago. Either that or form a group on the side that talks about the syndromes and possible countermeasures. Actually I should probably bump his thread to the top with a reference to what you just said. I'm pretty certain that programming young and impressionable minds with pseudoscience is near the top of their list.
 
To Write-4-You: What's wrong with you - frighting the battle so long you can't take - YES as in quote below from my post 1118?
"OK, you have convinced me. I'll join the "plant more hemp" ... Do you have any information on its ERE (Energy Return on input Energy) when producing methanol? Sugar cane's alcohol is nearly 10, and that is not counting fact that the crushed cane burns with much more heat release than needed for the distillation, so Brazil gets nearly 4 or 5% of its electric power from it. Hemp gets probably less, I guess, but needs much less fertilizer than Iowa's corn. Much of that fertilizer is converted into NOx by soil bacteria, so it is less damaging to the environment and public health to just used pure gasoline than Iowa's "gasohol." Iowa's corn ERE is barely unity as natural gas is used for the distillation, and making the fertilizer is energy intensive." but theses two questions remain.

It is probably too early to know the cost of hemp based methanol, per gallon, when not yet in mass production, but that is important too. Sugar cane based alcohol is cheaper to produce than gasoline when oil prices are greater than about 75 or 80 dollars per barrel.[/QUOTE]
 
sculptor said:
Every experiment has variables which must needs be accounted for, even those that are mostly observational.
Do you honestly believe that all variables have been accounted for in a balanced and unbiased (scientific) manner?
Click to expand...

Of course not. But the question is, if their are observable detrimental changes (we do have lots of data) is it better to be alarmed and concerned and if we have reason to suspect that these changes may have something to do with human activity, than to just "wait and see"?
 
@Billy T, there is no need for snide remarks.

I have no agenda here, just sharing information which may be of interest to others. I hoped the links i provided would give an interested party a starting point for deeper research.

It seemed to me that Hemp is the most versatile crop of any with an added bonus that it will grow where no other crop can, and requires the least maintenance and importantly, less water than any other crop.

In context of the OP, I presented hemp as an alternative "climate friendly" renewable enery resource crop with great versatility and low maintenance . I have no ax to grind here and didn't want to troll the subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top