I'm not going to go wading through the mountain of shit people hark on about, just to prove to myself that you are also full of shit.
Why all the abuse?
Is it because you've lost the argument?
SteveC
27 Jun 2014, 02:37 PM
OK, let's take smoking. I can't find one expert in the field that doesn't say that smoking is bad for the health. Can you find one who would disagree with that, let alone the 97% level that you originally claimed?
That wasn't the question that was asked about smoking.
The question was 'is smoking the primary cause of health problems in people who smoke cigarettes?'
Consider the difference between these two questions...
1. Does the climate change? 2. Are humans the primary cause of climate change?
If the alarmists said they had a 97% consensus on the first question then it might have been plausible, but to claim a 97% consensus on the second is ridiculous (and proven wrong by later surveys, and by the fact that many authors of the reviewed papers disputed Skeptical Science's interpretation of their papers).
That wasn't the question that was asked about smoking.
The question was 'is smoking the primary cause of health problems in people who smoke cigarettes?'
More bullshit and avoiding the question. You said "As somebody else said, claiming that 97% of experts are in complete agreement about ANYTHING is pretty ridiculous to begin with".
I mentioned smoking, nothing to do with your latest evasion. As in 'is smoking bad for your health?'. Find 3% of the experts that would disagree with that contention. You did say 'ANYTHING'. Even the tobacco companies don't deny that smoking is bad for your health.
When you emphasise 'ANYTHING' I took you at your word, unless you didn't mean it and retract it.
OK, let's take smoking. I can't find one expert in the field that doesn't say that smoking is bad for the health. Can you find one who would disagree with that, let alone the 97% level that you originally claimed? Jesus, even the tobacco companies don't deny its bad for the health. And you say that there are at least 3% of experts who deny that? Where are they?
Not really an expert (at least, to me, some people here seem to think he has all the answers), but I can find one...
Joseph Bast, co-founder, president and CEO of the Heartland Institute...
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
You said "As somebody else said, claiming that 97% of experts are in complete agreement about ANYTHING is pretty ridiculous to begin with
The question 'is smoking bad for your health' doesn't encompass everything about smoking. Would everyone say yes? I'm not sure... what about someone who has smoked all their life and still smokes at 100. It might do that person more harm to stop smoking. What about someone with an highly addictive personality who takes up smoking as a substitute for heroin? Is smoking bad for that person's health, if the alternative is heroin?
Just because most experts agree on a specific point doesn't mean they are in complete agreement about smoking.
1. Does the climate change? On this question, a 97% consensus is plausible, but it still doesn't mean 97% of experts are in complete agreement about climate change. In real life if you ask 100 random people this question you will get a range of views.
2. Are humans the primary cause of climate change? To claim a 97% consensus here is ridiculous (and proven incorrect by later surveys, and by the fact that many authors of the reviewed papers disputed Skeptical Science's interpretation of their papers).
Do you believe Skeptical Science's claim that 97% of experts believe humans are the primary cause of climate change?
The question 'is smoking bad for your health' doesn't encompass everything about smoking. Would everyone say yes? I'm not sure... what about someone who has smoked all their life and still smokes at 100. It might do that person more harm to stop smoking.
Just because most experts will agree on that point doesn't mean they are in complete agreement about smoking.
You can try and wriggle out of it all you want, but there are subjects that all experts agree on. If you can't accept that, fair enough. Another one from my earlier list, how many don't think that driving while drunk isn't a bad thing?
The question 'is smoking bad for your health' doesn't encompass everything about smoking. Would everyone say yes? I'm not sure... what about someone who has smoked all their life and still smokes at 100. It might do that person more harm to stop smoking. What about someone with an highly addictive personality who takes up smoking as a substitute for heroin? Is smoking bad for that person's health, if the alternative is heroin?
Just because most experts will agree on that point doesn't mean they are in complete agreement about smoking.
1. Does the climate change? On this question, a 97% consensus is plausible, but it still doesn't mean 97% of experts are in complete agreement about climate change. In real life if you ask 100 random people this question you will get a range of views.
2. Are humans the primary cause of climate change? To claim a 97% consensus here is ridiculous (and proven incorrect by later surveys, and by the fact that many authors of the reviewed papers disputed Skeptical Science's interpretation of their papers).
Do you believe Skeptical Science's claim that 97% of experts believe humans are the primary cause of climate change?
And that is the consummate lesson all should understand, when your argument falls apart like a cardboard box in a cyclone you divert divert and divert attention away from your primary argument and then attempt to bury or lose the original question.
This is a perfect study in dissemination of information to win an argument rather than expand your knowledge.
Bravo...
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
And that is the consummate lesson all should understand, when your argument falls apart like a cardboard box in a cyclone you divert divert and divert attention away from your primary argument and then attempt to bury or lose the original question.
This is a perfect study in dissemination of information to win an argument rather than expand your knowledge.
Bravo...
Thanks Peter, I was just about to post the same thing but you beat me to it. And articulated it better too.
How many don't think that driving while drunk isn't a bad thing?
Nearly all countries allow driving while under the influence of a certain amount of alcohol, and in some countries there are no drink driving laws at all.
I don't think it would be too hard to find experts around the world who don't see driving under the influence as a bad thing.
Do you believe Skeptical Science's claim that 97% of experts believe humans are the primary cause of climate change?
peter fraser
27 Jun 2014, 03:00 PM
And that is the consummate lesson all should understand, when your argument falls apart like a cardboard box in a cyclone you divert divert and divert attention away from your primary argument and then attempt to bury or lose the original question.
This is a perfect study in dissemination of information to win an argument rather than expand your knowledge.
Bravo...
Let's leave out the insults and stick to the topic please.
You might have missed my earlier reply to you...
Your theory for why there has been no rise in temperatures over the past two decades is that you believe ice is now absorbing all the heat.
My question was why do you believe the ice only started doing this 20 years ago? Why didn't the ice absorb all the heat during the past 100 years too?
im amazed the amount of times you claim to "win" arguments and simply ignore the plethora of information out there from experts in their respective fields..
there is no conclusive debunking that humans are causing global warming, in fact even in the most skeptical survey quoted here has 52% of scientists say we definitely are causing it , and 77% of those surveyed believe humans may have had some influence in the last 100 years - with only 4% thinking there is no warming.
Its simply not the time to throw the baby out with the bathwater because atmospheric temperatures didn't 100% follow a scientific theory - though still within range ..
as for your continual harping on about atmospheric temperature.. and why climate "alarmists" have "changed their theories" into ocean temperatures ...
Just because the global surface temperature has not risen significantly in the past decade doesn't mean the Earth's heat energy imbalance has vanished, though. Excess heat energy trapped by greenhouses gases can have more than one fate in the Earth system; among other things, it can cause water to evaporate, it can melt ice, and it can be mixed into the deep ocean by overturning currents.
That mixing coupled with water's naturally large heat capacity makes the global ocean the Earth’s biggest absorber of heat; scientists estimate the ocean absorbs more than 90 percent of the excess heat trapped in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases. When analyzing temperature patterns at different depths of the ocean, scientists observed that deep ocean temperatures—measured more than a half-mile down from the surface—began to rise significantly around 2000, while shallower waters warmed more slowly. This divergence took place at the same time that a natural climate cycle called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, or PDO, was shifting to a negative phase.
Now scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography have more evidence that this global "pause" has to do with conditions in the Pacific Ocean.
"We started the study trying to resolve several contradictions," says Shang-Ping Xie.
He and a colleague asked why the average global temperature has bucked its long-term upward trend. They also set out to explain why — even during this hiatus — there has been record melting of ice in the Arctic Ocean, and why there have been many new summertime heat records.
Xie says he can explain a lot of that simply by looking at what's been happening in the tropical waters of the Pacific Ocean. Waters there have been relatively cool, and that means the ocean can take up more heat than usual.
"It's gaining extra heat during the past 15 years, and that heat is being stored" in the deep ocean, he says.
There's no telling how long this cool phase will persist. But the previous Pacific cool phase, which started in the 1940s, lasted about 30 years. It can't last forever; the ocean will eventually return to a warm phase, "and when that happens, we will be seeing unprecedented rates of climate warming," he says.
Not only will we get the natural heat wave, but on top of that we'll also get all the warming from greenhouse gases that have been building up during this cold cycle.
Xie says he can also explain the continuing summer heat records and melting Arctic ice. It turns out that the plateau in average global temperatures is mostly the result of lower temperatures during the wintertime.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy