| | | >> I understand probability.
I really don't want to get into an unprovable pissing match, but from what I've seen you don't really grasp the basic concepts of probability or statistics.
Once again you have committed multiple logical fallacies, in this case multiple times on each of multiple points --
False cause, by inferring a causal relationship where none can be shown to exist, repetition of the bandwagon as well as composition/division.
>> When 80% of scientist's prefer dems to pubs that has statistical meaning. Especially when only 6% prefer pubs. And the reasons are clear.
There are a couple of different things happening here. It may be "statistically significant"; however, but the "reasons" are anything but clear and there is nothing you can do, statistically, that will make the reasons clear.
>> As well when 97% believe in manmade global warming only a fool would argue against them.
Do you not understand that this statement, taken alone, shows just how scientifically ignorant you are?
In the early 1800s there had existed a scientific consensus for 2000 years that bloodletting was the standard practice for treating innumerable illnesses. Do you not know the history of Galileo? Or that Einstein himself abhorred the concept of scientific consensus?
>> When less than 50% of pubs believe in evolution and all scientists know it is true, they are not going to join that party. They are going to think they are fools.
I don't know whether your figure is accurate (I doubt it) but you act as though "evolution" is a black-or-white issue and there are hard questions which remain unanswered.
Certainly, Ben Carson is more intelligent than you or me, and probably more intelligent than anyone either of us knows (and I know some pretty smart people). Yet, he does not believe in evolution.
This is not because he's an idiot, but because those are his religious beliefs. If you begin calling every person an idiot because you disagree with his religious views you're going to find a lot of highly intelligent people are cast out of the conversation. |
|
