An Inconvenient Ruling for An Inconvenient Truth

[pinhead]

Originally Posted by Quagmire

I see so these scientist aren't scientists.Two have died so their research is useless?

They never did any research in climatology! Even if they did, their research would not have any current data because one died 5 years ago.

Originally Posted by Quagmire

One is a crackpot on the fringes,shouldn't a good part of research be on the fringes? How else are we going to progress.Because a person isn't part of the " In Group" doesn't lessen his/her research effort.

Research on the fringes - yes. Listening to crackpots - no.

Originally Posted by Quagmire

All that aside as I look into the issue,one idea keeps nagging me.If global warming is largely caused by our emissions of greenhouse gas,then its a problem we should have been looking at 30 years ago.

Maybe it should have been looked at 30 years ago but the Kyoto Accord was signed in 1997.

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Almost forgot,here's an interesting survey

http://forecastingprinciples.com/Pub...armAudit31.pdf

forcastingprinciples.com "The Forecasting site seeks to develop a set of principles to guide forecasting for problems in management, operations research, and the social sciences"

These guys aren't climate scientists!!!!

One is from Business and Economic Forecasting Unit at Monash University in Melbourne and the other from Wharton Business school