Re: Consensus or senseless con?

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:69rnriF341n8hU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9AA880F103CAFWereofftoseethewizrd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:69mul0F32fmvfU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9AA6D130BA584Wereofftoseethewizrd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:69m34vF33r5haU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"Scout" <me4guns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0HbZj.13896$IK5.7736@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:69ktdrF339879U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


"Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9AA699BF7A30Wereofftoseethewizrd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=64734

Thursday, May 22, 2008


**There are a total of 40 (yes, FORTY) climate scientists who
signed this petition. Their opinions are the only ones of interest.

IOW, those that say what Trevor wants to hear are all that he needs
to listen to, those that say something else......well Trevor just
tells us to ignore them.

**Nope. Here's how it works in the real world:

* IF I find a suspicious lump, or I have a chest pain, I go to a
doctor. I don't go to a geologist.
* If my dog is sick, I go to a vet. I don't consult a climatologist.
* If my car makes a strange noise, I take it to a mechanic. I don't
consult a mathematician.
* If I want to know about climatology, I speak to a climatologist. I
don't ask an economist.


Then why don't you listen to actual firearms experts regarding
firearms?

**That would be a strawman. However, to answer your question, I am
always willing to listen to a firearms expert, when it comes to finding
out about firearms.

Like the shooter who can sto[ his heart?

**He is certainly far more knowledgable about firearms than I am.


And you are a genuine sap if you beleive your friend can stop his heart.



Just to bring you back on-topic: If I want to know about climatology, I
speak to a climatologist. I don't ask an economist.


You mean like

Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,697)

1. Atmosphere (578)

I) Atmospheric Science (114)
II) Climatology (40)
III) Meteorology (341 )

2. Earth (2,148)

I) Earth Science (107)
II) Geochemistry (62)
V) Geoscience (23)
VI) Hydrology (21)

3. Environment (971)

I) Environmental Engineering (473)
II) Environmental Science (256)
III) Forestry (156)
IV) Oceanography (86)


Who would have study data relecvant to "global warming" and would be
able to asses it's impact on thier areas of speciality?

**Climatologists. I've explained this to you before.


or

Biochemistry, Biology, & Agriculture (2,924)

1. Biochemistry (768)

I) Biochemistry (703)
II) Biophysics (65)

2. Biology (1,365)

I) Biology (985)
II) Ecology (72)
III) Entomology (57)
IV) Zoology (145)
V) Animal Science (106)

3. Agriculture (791)

I) Agricultural Science (314)
II) Agricultural Engineering (111)
III) Plant Science (292)
IV) Food Science (74)


Who also would be in a position to assess the impact of global warming
and attempts to curtail it?

**Climatologists supply the data. It is up to others to interpret that
data. The list is one of scientists who allegedly don't believe that the
thousands of climatologists, who have attested to the realiy of global
warming, are wrong. The ONLY sicentists who are qualified to comment on
what climatologists say, are other climatologists.

So only so called experts in thier respective fields are qualfied to render
not opinions but unchallengable assertions of fact the impact of which could
fundementally change man's place on the planet.

You may not have any faith in your own ability to rationally examine
assertions and refute them but I assur that many people can.



Sorry Trevor, selctive acceptance of experts and facts is only for the
weak minded and agenda driven.

**I accept that climatologists know about climate. It seems you don't. I
find that rather odd.



Than I expect that I will never see another post from you regarding firearms
or firearms law since you have acknowledged you are not an expert and frankly
many of your technical assertions have been deeply flawed.

Applying the same standard, do you acccept?

And the fact that you cannot accept that people have serious and well founded
reservations regarding "man made global warming" is really not relevant. I
don't accept any of the nonsense you have spouted about gun control. Does
that make you wrong?

Sorry when proposals are being made by people being paid by the state to find
the precise results that will stifle human activity, reduce wealth and put
control over every aspect of our lices under government control I think
listening to a few contrarian views is worthwhile.

And if even 40 climatolagists disagree with the intial premise then there is
no consensus. What method are you going to use to dismiss the 40 now that
you've reduced 31,072 scientists to 40?

Frank
.