Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 4 of 5
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ferret wrote:

This debate was originally about man-made global warming not global warming.


gc wrote:
How does that change the argument?



GC just eliminated any validity to his argument on this subject with that little quip! Do some more research. Might I suggest an elementary school library...
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
Craig wrote:
Assessment reports. Hmmmm. Wonder what that is....


Assessment reports are really no different than a letter of reference. Not exactly surprising considering most jobs require letters of reference.

Quote:
"Original research" - I guess that means not simply doing what your supervisor tells you to do.


Original research only means research that has not been done before. If I simply repeat an experiment that I read in the literature, that is not original research. If I do something that my supervisor asked me to do, and no one else has done it before, that is original research.


Also from UVic...

Quote:
All applicants are encouraged to e-mail any of the professors here with questions. They can not offer you a position in their research group based on e-mails, but they can indicate whether there are potential openings to be filled


Note my emphasis. Your contention that supervisors can't decide who gets admitted is clearly wrong.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
Again, I can't speak for all institutions, but every one that I applied to did not require me to secure a research supervisor. How do you know what most institutions require? Where did you find this information?


From my wife who is a professor who has sat on graduate selection committees at two Canadian universities. And from my own applications to UWO, U of T, and UW. And my wife's applications to UW, and UWO.

Quote:
How does that change the argument?


It doesn't. I just thought I would point it out.

Quote:
Conspiracy:
when people secretly plan together to do something bad or illegal


I never contended that they secretly planned this. Most "bias" is not secretly planned.


Anyway, clearly our heels are dug in. I give you credit for debating maturely. This was one of the more pleasant online debates I've had....
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:
GC just eliminated any validity to his argument on this subject with that little quip! Do some more research. Might I suggest an elementary school library...


You just lost any validity by not taking my comments in context. Neither global warming nor man-made global warming have been refuted 100%.
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
Note my emphasis. Your contention that supervisors can't decide who gets admitted is clearly wrong.


As I've said before, I can't speak for every institution, I can only speak for the ones I applied to. However, at those institutions a potential supervisor can not prevent someone from entering grad school because a potential supervisor is not required. In other words, I can't be rejected from grad school if I have no supervisor to reject me. I should say that it is possible for a supervisor to help a student get into grad school, however it is not a guarantee. My supervisor had a summer student who applied for grad school, and even with the supervisor's recommendation, he didn't get in. However, your comments in this thread imply that a student will not be accepted to grad school without the approval of their potential supervisor, which is simply false (again, I'm not speaking for every institution).

Craig wrote:
I never contended that they secretly planned this. Most "bias" is not secretly planned.


It wasn't secretly planned? If it wasn't secret, we would hear more about it. If it wasn't planned, it's hard to imagine thousands of scientists coming to the same conclusion by coincidence.

Quote:
Anyway, clearly our heels are dug in.


Fair enough.

Quote:
I give you credit for debating maturely. This was one of the more pleasant online debates I've had....


Thank you.
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
truth4freedom wrote:
GC just eliminated any validity to his argument on this subject with that little quip! Do some more research. Might I suggest an elementary school library...


You just lost any validity by not taking my comments in context. Neither global warming nor man-made global warming have been refuted 100%.


Or proven. How did I take your comments out of context?
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:
Or proven.


Yes, I mentioned that earlier.

Quote:
How did I take your comments out of context?


Either you didn't read my previous comments or you chose to ignore them. You implied that I don't know the difference between global warming and man-made global warming (or at least that I didn't know enough, hence the suggestion to do further research). My point was that it makes no difference to the point we were arguing, as neither global warming nor man-made global warming have been refuted. Even Craig agrees with me that it doesn't change the argument.
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
Either you didn't read my previous comments or you chose to ignore them. You implied that I don't know the difference between global warming and man-made global warming (or at least that I didn't know enough, hence the suggestion to do further research).


No, I implied that the difference of global warming vs. man made global warming changes the argument where you stated it did not. The scientific consensus differs on whether there is global warming vs. that global warming is caused by man. This trickles down to the funding issue. There's two separate subjects there and most scientists in this article dispute that global warming is man made, not that it is occurring.
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:

No, I implied that the difference of global warming vs. man made global warming changes the argument where you stated it did not. The scientific consensus differs on whether there is global warming vs. that global warming is caused by man.


Look back at my original comment. I stated that "One thing I think everyone can agree on is that global warming has not be proven 100% one way or the other. It certainly hasn't been proven false like the ether has." To that, Craig replied that the debate was about man-made global warming not global warming. Now look back at my original comment and replace "global warming" with "man-made global warming" and you get this:

"One thing I think everyone can agree on is that man-made global warming has not be proven 100% one way or the other. It certainly hasn't been proven false like the ether has."

Now, are you disputing that? Are you trying to tell me that man-made global warming has undisputedly been refuted?
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Absolutely not. What i am saying is that if you are addressing global warming it is a whole different debate than if you are addressing man made global warming. It changes the debate immensely. But I got the impression that you believe it doesn't change the nature of the debate from your statement.
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:
But I got the impression that you believe it doesn't change the nature of the debate from your statement.


Probably because you didn't notice that I said it doesn't change the fact that global warming/man-made global warming has not been undisputedly refuted. That is true whether you use "global warming" or "man-made global warming" in that sentence. Do you agree?
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
truth4freedom wrote:
But I got the impression that you believe it doesn't change the nature of the debate from your statement.


Probably because you didn't notice that I said it doesn't change the fact that global warming/man-made global warming has not been undisputedly refuted. That is true whether you use "global warming" or "man-made global warming" in that sentence. Do you agree?


I would say global warming is far more undisputed as occuring and that man made global warming is far more disputed as occuring. Both are near the edge on opposite sides of the spectrum.
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

truth4freedom wrote:
I would say global warming is far more undisputed as occuring and that man made global warming is far more disputed as occuring. Both are near the edge on opposite sides of the spectrum.


Well, ignoring the fact that the IPCC (consisting of thousands of scientists) said that it is very likely (>90% confidence) that humans are the major factor responsible for global warming, I don't think anyone can say with absolute certainty that global warming is not caused by humans. That is the only point I was trying to get across. Do you agree?
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
Well, ignoring the fact that the IPCC (consisting of thousands of scientists) said that it is very likely (>90% confidence) that humans are the major factor responsible for global warming, I don't think anyone can say with absolute certainty that global warming is not caused by humans. That is the only point I was trying to get across. Do you agree?

I'm sure there are others more knowledgeable about climate change than I am but my understanding is the IPCC's actual reports don't mention that >90% confidence figure. It's only the Executive Summary for Policy Makers which mentions that... and the summary is written by a handful of scientists and bureaucrats, not by thousands of scientists. The summary is designed for policy makers (ie: politicians) and it's sole purpose, like Craig has said, is to scare politicians into pushing resources to climate change research.

-Mac
truth4freedom





Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 255
Reputation: 23.7Reputation: 23.7
votes: 3
Location: Bible Belt USA!

PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
Well, ignoring the fact that the IPCC (consisting of thousands of scientists) said that it is very likely (>90% confidence) that humans are the major factor responsible for global warming, I don't think anyone can say with absolute certainty that global warming is not caused by humans. That is the only point I was trying to get across. Do you agree?


Quote:
...While more than 2,000 scientists were consulted by the IPCC in drafting its reports, not all of them have agreed with the findings. However, even if there had been total agreement among this group, we cannot ignore the fact that these scientists were handpicked by the IPCC and their respective governments, most of which were beating the drums for the Kyoto treaty. Therefore, the IPCC's reports have been the products of political rather than scientific processes...

...the spokesman for the IPCC also claims that the climate has warmed in the last 50 years. However, he and other scientists have seen little or no warming since about 1940. Therefore, they can't put much faith in these "theoretical forecasts."...

...Another important factor to consider:


While the IPCC is able to show a recent temperature rise by averaging data from surface thermometers, there is no corresponding rise when data is obtained from well-controlled weather stations where local heating urban effects are eliminated.

Data from more reliable weather satellites show no appreciable warming trend since 1979, nor does the data gathered from weather balloons.

Data from tree rings, ice cores and ocean sediments shows, after the modest 1.0 degree global warming of the last 140 years, present-day temperatures remain cooler by about 1.0 degree than they were when the Vikings settled Greenland in medieval times...

source

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 4 of 5

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Majority of scientists dismiss man-made global warming

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB