1. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29867
    11 Feb '19 13:58
    @kellyjay said
    So insulting without anything of substance, typical.
    How are those observations "insulting"? I haven't called you a "gutless puke" or a "nasty liar" or a "slithering coward" or anything like that.
  2. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    11 Feb '19 16:49
    @fmf said
    How are those observations "insulting"? I haven't called you a "gutless puke" or a "nasty liar" or a "slithering coward" or anything like that.
    Touche, when the discussion goes personal the topic is not being discussed. I could go back and read more things you have said, but I think it isn’t necessary.
  3. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    94952
    11 Feb '19 17:48
    @kellyjay said
    [youtube] W1_KEVaCyaA [/youtube]
    Can you provide links to the peer review publications that support the claims made in this 'documentary'..please.
  4. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    11 Feb '19 17:49
    @stellspalfie said
    Can you provide links to the peer review publications that support the claims made in this 'documentary'..please.
    You can search for them if you want to.
  5. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    94952
    11 Feb '19 18:00
    @kellyjay said
    You can search for them if you want to.
    have you read them?
  6. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    11 Feb '19 18:12
    @stellspalfie said
    have you read them?
    There something wrong with the argument you want to highlight, or just highlight peer view papers on a video were or were not written? I would care about the first not so much the latter.
  7. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    94952
    11 Feb '19 18:33
    @kellyjay said
    There something wrong with the argument you want to highlight, or just highlight peer view papers on a video were or were not written? I would care about the first not so much the latter.
    Well that's your big issue. You should care more about the latter. Its the actual science that counts not how persuasive the argument is.


    So, have you checked to see if the science behind the claims made in the video is solid? Or do you just accept it.
  8. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    94952
    11 Feb '19 18:36
    @kellyjay said
    There something wrong with the argument you want to highlight, or just highlight peer view papers on a video were or were not written? I would care about the first not so much the latter.
    Got another quick question for you - What is it about ice core and tree ring data that makes you think its an unreliable source for climate change modelling?
  9. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    11 Feb '19 18:54
    @stellspalfie said
    Well that's your big issue. You should care more about the latter. Its the actual science that counts not how persuasive the argument is.


    So, have you checked to see if the science behind the claims made in the video is solid? Or do you just accept it.
    Do you automatically accept peer review papers?
  10. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    94952
    11 Feb '19 19:502 edits
    @kellyjay said
    Do you automatically accept peer review papers?
    No, that would be silly. It certainly goes a long way towards making me take the idea or claim seriously though.


    How do you discern which youtube videos are pseudoscience and which are real science?
  11. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    11 Feb '19 20:07
    @stellspalfie said
    No, that would be silly. It certainly goes a long way towards making me take the idea or claim seriously though.


    How do you discern which youtube videos are pseudoscience and which are real science?
    Great question, if neither can be totally trusted don’t you think argument not where it is and isn’t shown should stand on its own?
  12. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    94952
    11 Feb '19 20:48
    @kellyjay said
    Great question, if neither can be totally trusted don’t you think argument not where it is and isn’t shown should stand on its own?
    Which would you choose to diagnose your illness a Doctor or a Hollywood actor who plays a Doctor? Neither can be 100% trusted but one should be taken a lot more seriously than the other.

    So although a peer reviewed theory may draw incorrect conclusions it should be take seriously and despite being incorrect conclusions, will still contain useful data and science.

    The youtube clip that provides no evidence or explanation of data science should not be trusted unless research and evidence to substantiate the claims can be found.


    You never answered my question about trees and ice.
  13. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    11 Feb '19 21:451 edit
    @stellspalfie said
    Which would you choose to diagnose your illness a Doctor or a Hollywood actor who plays a Doctor? Neither can be 100% trusted but one should be taken a lot more seriously than the other.

    So although a peer reviewed theory may draw incorrect conclusions it should be take seriously and despite being incorrect conclusions, will still contain useful data and science.

    ...[text shortened]... ce to substantiate the claims can be found.


    You never answered my question about trees and ice.
    It’s not a good comparison since the letters behind the names involved are all impressive on both sides of the discussion. You can look at the reasoning being deployed, validate the variables, and check out the methodology. You find something off highlight it.

    I’ve done that with things presented here, again if the arguments are sound that is the bottom line!

    How many posts have we made and you have not touched what was presented, you have only questioned the source?

    I am sorry about your question about trees and ice will respond when I get home.
  14. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29867
    12 Feb '19 01:52
    @kellyjay said
    Touche, when the discussion goes personal the topic is not being discussed. I could go back and read more things you have said, but I think it isn’t necessary.
    "Touche"?
  15. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148787
    12 Feb '19 02:01
    @fmf said
    "Touche"?
    You are right I was wrong.
Back to Top