SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics of Energy
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Little Joe who wrote (14451)12/2/2009 9:24:07 PM
From: RetiredNow  Read Replies (4) of 86356
 
No. What I'm saying is that anyone that proposes a theory needs to back it up with transparent empirical data and reproducible analysis that is rigorously peer reviewed.

The GW deniers have proposed an alternative theory, which is that the globe is not warming. Then they point to the last 10 years and say that is proof. However, they ignore the steady increase over the decades prior to that and the relatively sharp increase in the last 50 years. So any statistician will tell you that the overall warming trend is intact and that the last 10 years is an anomaly. It takes more than a few data points below the mean to declare a trend dead.

So all I'm saying is that if you deny the globe is warming and that is your theory, then prove it with data and let it be peered reviewed. Empty criticism of someone else's theory doesn't bring you credibility.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News