Originally posted by lee_merrill
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Thanks for the moon
Collapse
X
-
"Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostYou have yet to make the case that Mars' climate share enough similarities with Earth's to be a relevant example.
And the article doesn't help, given that it mentions nothing about the time involved in Mars' climate shifts.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostHow about here?
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostIt mentions a "100,000-year cycle", which would give a timeframe for the interval the changes would fit in.
"Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostSo, it has in the past, when we can't observe the consequences.
So, about the same time frame as the glacial cycles here, which do not cause mass extinctions.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThere just doesn't appear to be much difference in the rotational axial tilt between Mars and Earth, and the former never had a large moon.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostI would just say the rotational tilts happen to be similar right now, not that they had never varied.
Blessings,
Lee
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
Dramatic climatic shifts such as happened to Mars, which would indeed make earth difficult for many, or even most forms of life.
Blessings,
Lee
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostBut they project that the consequences would be dramatic, no observation required.
We can talk more when you're interested in actual science, rather than interpreting everything as supporting what you'd like to believe.
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostBut the consequences would again be more dramatic than an ice age."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostYes, because "dramatic" is such a precise scientific term, that it makes it a simple matter to project what its effects are.
We can talk more when you're interested in actual science, rather than interpreting everything as supporting what you'd like to believe.
Do you somehow think a more dramatic wobble means larger temperature changes? Because if you do, you're wrong.
Do you believe the American Medical Association is qualified to corroborate data related to the earth's climate?
Please do not consider what their statement might be, because it could be anything. But only in regard to their specific specialization can/should they corroborate anything outside of their field?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ronson View Post
I have a question for you regarding a discussion in another forum:
Do you believe the American Medical Association is qualified to corroborate data related to the earth's climate?
Please do not consider what their statement might be, because it could be anything. But only in regard to their specific specialization can/should they corroborate anything outside of their field?
Typically, things like "would you confirm or deny blanket statement X" are gotcha questions, not a serious attempt at an enlightening discussion. They avoid all the subtlety that's essential for understanding a complicated topic."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostThe statement's not specific enough. The AMA includes some people who are superb with statistics, and can determine whether some statistical work done in processing climate data is done properly. They can also, obviously, weigh in on the epidemiology of climate change's effect on human health, which certainly falls into "data related to the earth's climate". Other areas of climate science, like paleoreconstructions and climate models, would be well beyond almost everyone in the AMA.
Typically, things like "would you confirm or deny blanket statement X" are gotcha questions, not a serious attempt at an enlightening discussion. They avoid all the subtlety that's essential for understanding a complicated topic.
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
My understanding is that the AMA is not qualified to assess climate change and merely relies on the research done by others. So, in that sense, they cannot join a consensus since they don't do any original research. They may agree with the findings, in that they are convinced by the findings, and such can endorse the findings. But without original research on climate change, they cannot be part of a consensus. Again, it doesn't matter what their conclusion is, only that they aren't qualified.
NASA should not include them on a "consensus" list. NASA actually links to a list of 198 global agencies, groups and government bodies as part of the over all consensus (further down on the same page).
I also offer this definition of "scientific consensus" put forth by Ethan Siegel: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...h=671eff726bae
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ronson View PostMy understanding is that the AMA is not qualified to assess climate change and merely relies on the research done by others. So, in that sense, they cannot join a consensus since they don't do any original research. They may agree with the findings, in that they are convinced by the findings, and such can endorse the findings. But without original research on climate change, they cannot be part of a consensus. Again, it doesn't matter what their conclusion is, only that they aren't qualified.
In those senses, the AMA's conclusions about where the consensus lies may be helpful for identifying the consensus. Not as valuable as generating or analyzing the data that produced the consensus in the first place, but valuable in the sense of helping no scientists determine what the consensus is."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostNow that is an interesting and subtle issue. Not every doctor understands science well, but the AMA should include enough who do that they'd be able to evaluate the evidence and arguments presented by others, and determine where the weight of it resides, which is a less technical issue than things like the ones i mentioned earlier. They should also be able to look at other fields and figure out the difference between a consensus and bring opinions in it, since they have to be able to recognize that in their own field.
In those senses, the AMA's conclusions about where the consensus lies may be helpful for identifying the consensus. Not as valuable as generating or analyzing the data that produced the consensus in the first place, but valuable in the sense of helping no scientists determine what the consensus is.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostCouldn't a couple of statisticians do that?
Depends. In climate science, that was done successfully. But that's not always guaranteed to work. For issues like "are the small hominins of Flores a separate species or deformed modern humans?", the scientific literature was filled with arguments because a small group of people remained convinced they were right, even though most of the field gradually accepted "new species" as the answer. So it wasn't something that you could just tally up the papers for and against and come to the right conclusion.
It's one of those cases where science being a messy, very human activity makes things difficult."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 02:47 PM
|
0 responses
6 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
05-03-2024, 02:47 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 12:33 PM
|
1 response
16 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
05-03-2024, 01:14 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-27-2024, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
12 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
04-27-2024, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by shunyadragon, 04-26-2024, 10:10 PM
|
5 responses
23 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
04-28-2024, 08:10 AM
|
||
Started by shunyadragon, 04-25-2024, 08:37 PM
|
2 responses
12 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
04-25-2024, 10:21 PM
|
Comment