Originally posted by nando
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Global Warming is over.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by nando View PostI kind of see polluting the environment as a deficit, like our government borrowing money. Eventually, we'll have to pay it back, + interest.
in the long run it's cheaper to deal with the problem than wait until it's too late. How expensive you do think it will be to deal with a 6 meter sea level rise..
And food costs. And ski resorts being as 'great' as they were this past year. Plus, how many parents got arrested this summer for leaving babies in cars that were 110 degrees inside?
It's like just because Big Oil pays lobbyists to have Congress support them that people stop thinking for themselves and want to burn up dinosaur juice and ignore the rest of the world's beliefs... so that oil companies can prosper? Are you kidding me? It's not like Oil pays you to parrot Fox News.
Comment
-
Originally posted by nando View PostA science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
yeah, this guy is pretty credible... the guys with PHDs are obviously unqualified, but the talking head that has a book to sell you, well..
yup, when losing the argument attack the messenger. and him quoting/interviewing skeptical Phd's apparently isn't good enough.
oh, and i'll argue like rwh agian
rwh, pull your head out of your ass and open your eyes will you?“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
Comment
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Postyup, when losing the argument attack the messenger. and him quoting/interviewing skeptical Phd's apparently isn't good enough.
oh, and i'll argue like rwh agian
rwh, pull your head out of your ass and open your eyes will you?
Maybe if you got a real education, you'd have learned this at some point:
To evaluate authority:
What is the author's reputation among his/her peers?
Is the author associated with a reputable institution or organization?
To evaluate objectivity:
Does the author state the goals for this publication?
Inform, explain, educate
Advocate
Persuade or dissuade
Sell a product or service [aka all of your economist sources]
Serve as a soapbox
Does the author exhibit a particular bias?
Commitment to a point of view
Acknowledgement of bias
Presentation of facts and arguments for both sides of a controversial issue
Language free of emotion-arousing words and bias
Is the viewpoint of the author's affiliation reflected in the message or content?
Does the information appear to be valid and well-researched?
Reasonable assumptions and conclusions
Arguments and conclusions supported by evidence
Opposing points of view addressed
Opinions not disguised as facts
Authoritative sources cited
To evaluate quality:
Is the information well-organized?
Logical structure
Main points clearly presented
Main ideas unified by overarching idea
Text flows well (not choppy or stilted)
Author's argument is not repetitive
Has the author used good grammar?
Are there spelling or typographical errors?
Is the information complete and accurate?
Facts and results agree with your own knowledge of the subject
Facts and results agree with those of other specialists in the field
Documents sources (a very important indicator of quality)
Describes methodology
Addresses theories and facts that may negate the main thesis
Avoids questionable assumptions
Comment
-
then you didn't read the article rwh
the book is interviews from dissenting scientists, it is not his opinion, it is a compilation of the scientists' opinions
maybe you care to rebutt the points brought up?“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
Comment
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Postthen you didn't read the article rwh
the book is interviews from dissenting scientists, it is not his opinion, it is a compilation of the scientists' opinions
maybe you care to rebutt the points brought up?
Comment
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Postyup, when losing the argument attack the messenger. and him quoting/interviewing skeptical Phd's apparently isn't good enough.
oh, and i'll argue like rwh agian
rwh, pull your head out of your ass and open your eyes will you?
Comment
-
maybe you can help me
i did mechanical/hydraulic engineering to get thru college, so i tend to follow numbers and where they lead. you know, a+b=c
with AGW, it seems to me your side has made up their collective minds that anyone with a dissenting opinion, no matter their qualifications, no matter their backgrounds, cannot be believed. that anything+anything always equals c.
that is what i don't get, so yes, it is what it is“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
Comment
-
Originally posted by rwh11385 View PostYou posted an article with a person interviewing an author who wrote a book about AGW deniers and was promoting it. That's like taking economic information from someone selling a book about economic advice or selling a mutual fund.
your ongoing comments do nothing more than prove you have no clue what i do. being an economist is akin to being an auditor (no offense to you auditors). it would be like watching paint dry.“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill
Comment
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Postmaybe you can help me
i did mechanical/hydraulic engineering to get thru college, so i tend to follow numbers and where they lead. you know, a+b=c
with AGW, it seems to me your side has made up their collective minds that anyone with a dissenting opinion, no matter their qualifications, no matter their backgrounds, cannot be believed. that anything+anything always equals c.
that is what i don't get, so yes, it is what it is
Btw, my car is not for sale, but thanks for the interest George.sigpic
Comment
Comment