The KGB Oracle
Serving the online gaming community since 1997
Visit www.the-kgb.com
For additional information

Join KGB DISCORD: http://discord.gg/KGB
 
KGB Information
Untitled 1

Visit KGB HQ
www.the-kgb.com

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 29 guests, and 26 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
Today's Birthdays
Devan Omega
Newest Members
Luckystrikes, Shingen, BillNyeCommieSpy, Lamp, AllenGlines
1,477 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums53
Topics13,094
Posts116,355
Members1,477
Most Online276
Aug 3rd, 2023
Top Likes Received (30 Days)
None yet
Top Posters(30 Days)
Popular Topics(Views)
1,987,444 Trump card
1,324,088 Picture Thread
473,917 Romney
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6
Derid Offline OP
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
OP Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/...ming-alarmists/

Even as MSM and extreme lefties go about foaming at the mouth to confirm their bias, luckily there is some real science still occurring on the topic.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
Global warming denials are out there with evolutionary denials. Go buy oceanfront property if you are so sure.


[Linked Image]
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6
Derid Offline OP
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
OP Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6

Article read fail. Comprehension fail. You shouldnt be so scared of assimilating new info just because it isnt pre-approved for extremist consumption by the mouth foamers over at Mother Jones.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
If one to read only Mother Jones or opinion section of WSJ, I'd bet MJ reader would be more informed.

I read somewhere about conservative media conference where all lead conservative voices got together and were discussing return to journalism. Last I hear, they decided to blame lack of journalistic integrity on the right on Obama.


[Linked Image]
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6
Derid Offline OP
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
OP Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6

A point that might (for the sake of argument) hypothetically have relevance if the OP was a WSJ article.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
****
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: sini
Global warming denials are out there with evolutionary denials. Go buy oceanfront property if you are so sure.


foil

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
If you actually read the article - it does not refute the study in any form. It mostly criticizes media, does couple weak character assassination attempts, and cites some methodology concerns (that would not invalidate the study) from the previous study.

This type of "impossible standard" attack is the only way they can attempt to discredit what is now very uncontroversial scientific consensus.

Consider this: Any study that could soundly disprove "global warming" would not only have unlimited budget from Big Oil, Big Coal and such, but would also guarantee publications for life, probably a Nobel, tenure, and more fame than could be had anywhere else in the climate science field.


[Linked Image]
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6
Derid Offline OP
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
OP Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6

I suggest googling up the references, heck it actually linked to several works cited criticizing the study. I suggest you read again.

That you even think that the refutation was of "global warming" shows that you either did not read the article, or have a very low level of reading comprehension.

What this article was highlighting, is the refutation of an "alarmist" study that had gotten media attention for the study, but not the refutation when it turns out to be bad science.

The article was not about refuting global warming , it was about how certain sectors hyperventilate over untested claims that end up withering under peer review simply because it makes for titillating news.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
You are reading too much into that article. It boils down to "media on the right always wrong, they report it, so this must be wrong". It was a anti-global warming hit article.


[Linked Image]
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
****
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: sini
If you actually read the article - it does not refute the study in any form. It mostly criticizes media, does couple weak character assassination attempts, and cites some methodology concerns (that would not invalidate the study) from the previous study.

This type of "impossible standard" attack is the only way they can attempt to discredit what is now very uncontroversial scientific consensus.

Consider this: Any study that could soundly disprove "global warming" would not only have unlimited budget from Big Oil, Big Coal and such, but would also guarantee publications for life, probably a Nobel, tenure, and more fame than could be had anywhere else in the climate science field.


foil

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Derid 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5