Originally posted by gwb72tii
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Global Warming is over.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by gwb72tii View Postthe giants are on but i have it taped
so you mean, in the end, the 97% comes down to a skewed poll that relies on less than 100 respondents. that poll?
I think you don't give basis for your statements because you have more "flexibility" in describing reality.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rwh11385 View PostThe poll itself actually had 3146 respondents, with a subset of climatologists who are actively publishing on the subject at focus... if you care to be factual, which you usually don't. The overall view was 82% when including non-specialists.
I think you don't give basis for your statements because you have more "flexibility" in describing reality.
so do you have a link?
here's one
“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 BraveUlysses View Postyou don't really expect anything different from P&R's preeminent troll do 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 Post
Trying to ignore/invalidate a poll by incorrectly stating its overall sample size is ridiculous, per usual for you. If I poll 2000 Americans and state a statistic for a particular demographic with a subset size of 50, does that mean that the overall sample in the poll magically is reduced to 50? No. Having you and Fusion trying to attack polls out of absolute ignorance is laughable.Last edited by rwh11385; 10-25-2012, 07:57 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rwh11385 View PostIt's in this thread previously. But the numbers I just posted are confirmed in your link, or can you not read?
Trying to ignore/invalidate a poll by incorrectly stating its overall sample size is ridiculous, per usual for you. If I poll 2000 Americans and state a statistic for a particular demographic with a subset size of 50, does that mean that the overall sample in the poll magically is reduced to 50? No. Having you and Fusion trying to attack polls out of absolute ignorance is laughable.
it reads, in part, 82% answered "yes" to question 2 about humans influencing climate change. it then reduces the sample size to 79 (admitted climate scientists) to get to the magic 97%.
further, it only polled researchers and scientists who are on the public ticket, universities and government funded, which in and of itself is skewed.
so a sample size of 79 is "proof" of the consensus? that is what you're hanging your hat on? there has been no wide polling of climate scientists about AGW, yet this "poll" is held up as the standard for calling anyone who doubts AGW as deniers.
you cannot make this shit 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 Postno, i'm sorry, the numbers are not confirmed you dolt, if you care to read how the poll was skewed.
it reads, in part, 82% answered "yes" to question 2 about humans influencing climate change. it then reduces the sample size to 79 (admitted climate scientists) to get to the magic 97%.
so a sample size of 79 is "proof" of the consensus? that is what you're hanging your hat on? there has been no wide polling of climate scientists about AGW, yet this "poll" is held up as the standard for calling anyone who doubts AGW as deniers.
you cannot make this shit up
Originally posted by rwh11385 View PostThe poll itself actually had 3146 respondents, with a subset of climatologists who are actively publishing on the subject at focus... if you care to be factual, which you usually don't. The overall view was 82% when including non-specialists.
I think you don't give basis for your statements because you have more "flexibility" in describing reality.
generating responses from 3,146 peopleQ2. “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean
global temperatures?”
Overall, 90 percent of respondents answered “risen” to question 1 and 82 percent answered
“yes” to question 2.
Surveys make mention of the values within select demographic subsets all the time, and it's not "proof" of anything except that was the statistic of the responses collected within the subset, as explained in the publication. The fact that you are completely ignorant of statistics does not mean the metric was wrong. What media use as their headline or how people use the data point to justify anything is on the user, not necessarily the methods of the source - which very clearly gave the subset size in the publication.
As usual, you try to build a strawman by implying I said anything besides proving your statement was incorrect because you are clueless. But hey, maybe you could learn something, anything, about statistics before saying ignorant shit based on what a conservative think-tank prints, since Heartland also got paid by PhillipMorris to claim that their 'research' showed second-hand smoke didn't have negative health effects.Last edited by rwh11385; 10-25-2012, 09:55 AM.
Comment
-
good god you're obtuse
the poll question doesn't even ask what your side says the poll proves. it does not ask if climate change is caused by human activity, only if human activity has had an infuence.
that is far different than what you and others would have us skeptics believe.“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 Postgood god you're obtuse
the poll question doesn't even ask what your side says the poll proves. it does not ask if climate change is caused by human activity, only if human activity has had an infuence.
that is far different than what you and others would have us skeptics believe.
And more insult to my care for facts and understanding of what is being criticized, so dull I know. Lying and misleading like you is so much more exciting - heck you get paid for that! So do think-tanks.
Explain to me how human activity has an influence but doesn't cause change.
Comment
Comment