You are wrong. I would say that b is the appropriate response, but to be honest, it is a poor analogy.
And if you look at the data from the ice cores, it shows what I (and others) have been saying...the climate is cyclical. The earth warms up and cools down on a cycle. All I am trying to say is that based on that information it seems as if we are currently in the warming side of that cycle, so, it is difficult to ascertain if the warming we have encountered is from that natural upswing or from humans. On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Gruss Gott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Scott wrote: > > I have not seen any evidence that proves uneqivocally that the climate > > change we are experiencing is from natural climate change or as a result > of > > cars and factories. > > I will illustrate the problem I see with your reasoning with an > excellent analogy (as usual): > > Let's say it's 3am and you're awoken by a loud noise. You hear some > further bumps and bangs. > > You know that there is noise, but you don't know if it actually is > something you need to worry about or not. > > Do you: > > (a.) Get out of bed and further investigate. > > (b.) Get out of bed to investigate, arm yourself, and alert your wife > she may need to dial 911, or > > (c.) Stay in bed because you don't have conclusive proof anything is wrong. > > Robert, of course, would argue that throughout history there's been > noise created by forces greater than man can muster and therefore the > noises you hear must not be due to any impending danger. > > You would argue that you're only judging the noise based on this one > night, which is not a large enough sample space to determine if the > noise is a certain threat or a benign occurrence. > > I would argue that (b.) is the appropriate response: you expend > resources to determine the nature of the problem and you take action > that begins to prepare you for the worst; i.e. you don't call the > police, but you arm yourself, investigate, and you prepare to call the > police. > > As to your sample space argument, btw, there are ice core samples that > go back millions of years. > > Oh, right, Sam. He would listen to Rush, Hannity, and some other > wackos normal people don't know exist. Then he'd provide 5 links to a > study some neo-cons did with a wind sock and plant mister, and that he > would say proves that global warming is a conspiracy hatched by > Clinton and George Soros which is obviously the reason Vince Foster is > dead. I'm summarizing his argument, of course. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:283459 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
