What I do not understand is that you posted links to 'studies' that pretty much backup Sam's statement and then try to slam him for not liking 'empirical evidence'
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Ian Skinner <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 11/20/2009 7:04 AM, Sam wrote: >> So if your theory is correct it would be getting warmer already, yet >> for the last decade temps haven't increased. >> >> Splain. > > Which is exactly what you get if you ask a bunch of statisticians to > analyze a set of number in a blind study without telling them what the > numbers represent. > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091026/ap_on_bi_ge/us_sci_global_cooling > http://www.drudge.com/news/127017/statisticians-reject-global-cooling-blind > http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ap-impact-statisticians-reject-174088.html > > But, I presume empirical evidence like this does not sway you Sam, > because you can find a minority who will disagree with it somehow. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:308156 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
