Dave’s a loyal reader and fellow dog show traveller, so I’m shooting him a link: Apparently, 970,000 Scientists are Missing in Action.
Scroll up and check out the rest of his site while you’re there. Try not to break the server.
Dave’s a loyal reader and fellow dog show traveller, so I’m shooting him a link: Apparently, 970,000 Scientists are Missing in Action.
Scroll up and check out the rest of his site while you’re there. Try not to break the server.
Maybe they moved to Galt’s Gulch?
“you develop a hypothesis, then you test it and try to disprove it. If it stands up, then it is accepted as a possibility, if it fails, then you have to rethink the hypothesis” Dave’s
AS I see the science of today. They short hand the process such that all meaning is lost! The Science is dependent on a pure speculation of probabilities. That is soft science IMHO
The buzz words “Correlation does not imply causation” is an empty conclusion. In all problem solving endeavors one must make the assumption that the data (Correlation) does imply Causation and then prove that it does or that it does not stand up. It is the only way to a scientific conclusion.
Reference:
.Edward Tufte, in a criticism of the brevity of “correlation does not imply causation”, deprecates the use of “is” to relate correlation and causation (as in “Correlation is not causation”), citing its inaccuracy as incomplete.[1] While it is not the case that correlation is causation, simply stating their nonequivalence omits information about their relationship. Tufte suggests that the shortest true statement that can be made about causality and correlation is one of the following:[4]
•”Empirically observed covariation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for causality.”
•”Correlation is not causation but it sure is a hint.”
Philip you should check out this link at this site for many erudite discussions on correlation and causation. You may find a kindred spirit The current reliance on wee “p” values that has crept in from the soft sciences proves your point that, The Science is dependent on a pure speculation of probabilities.
http://wmbriggs.com/post/16597/
Maybe John Cookie has them all locked up.
Given all the inferences at Sceptical Science, hence forth referred to as SS, which is anything but sceptical or scientific.
The childish photoshops.
How deep do the 3rd Retch synonyms go?
Is the 97% which these characters claimed they found, all held in a SS gulag?
Will they be liberated into Paris this winter?
The statements “correlation does not imply causation” and “correlation is not causation” are not even remotely equivalent, as anyone who has studied formal logic would know.
You just can’t debate with the “climate change” people, which group includes almost ALL of our politicians,even the alleged conservatives, they just fall back on the dogma like the true religious zealots they are.
If I hear that “97% of scientists agree…” bullsh** again, I may upchuck lunch,and on every site in this fair Dominion,they repeat that as though it was the Gospel according to Allah.
Maybe as those fear mongering posts Lance presented the last few days claimed, we are headed for catastrophic global warming extinction,except for the hip,cool,and trendy people who will somehow survive.
I imagine God has a plan for Al,Rajendra,Mikey, and Davy and the Gang.
You just can’t debate with the “climate change” people, which group includes almost ALL of our politicians,even the alleged conservatives, they just fall back on the dogma like the true religious zealots they are.
If I hear that “97% of scientists agree…” bullsh** again, I may upchuck lunch,and on every site in this fair Dominion,they repeat that as though it was the Gospel according to Allah.
Maybe as those fear mongering posts Lance presented the last few days claimed, we are headed for catastrophic global warming extinction,except for the hip,cool,and trendy people who will somehow survive.
I imagine God has a plan for Al,Rajendra,Mikey, and Davy and the Gang.
His observations on CRA’s stealthy move to an arbitrary and regulatory-based regime of intimidation, unconstrained by any avenue of appeal, are even better. The Income Tax Act has not been formally amended in almost three decades and given the yearly “changes by way of notice of intent to introduce legislation” which have never made it all the way through Parliament, is arguably non-operative. This is a subject that deserves much greater focus than anyone (outside people like Dave) are giving it.
His observations on CRA’s stealthy move to an arbitrary and regulatory-based regime of intimidation, unconstrained by any avenue of appeal, are even better. The Income Tax Act has not been formally amended in almost three decades and given the yearly “changes by way of notice of intent to introduce legislation” which have never made it all the way through Parliament, is arguably non-operative. This is a subject that deserves much greater focus than anyone (outside people like Dave) are giving it.
His observations on CRA’s stealthy move to an arbitrary and regulatory-based regime of intimidation, unconstrained by any avenue of appeal, are even better. The Income Tax Act has not been formally amended in almost three decades and given the yearly “changes by way of notice of intent to introduce legislation” which have never made it all the way through Parliament, is arguably non-operative. This is a subject that deserves much greater focus than anyone (outside people like Dave) are giving it.
His observations of the CRA over reach are right on the money.
Of course you should have expected this, the idiots formerly at the Firearms Registry, had to be reassigned .
Where do you think they went?
Mindless bureaucratic zombies…
Naturals for Revenue Canada.
There is no money or future tenure in “everything is fine”, or “we can’t find anything out of the usual”. The “sky is falling” , on the other hand means guaranteed employment in the valiant effort to save the planet. No different than all the witch doctors throughout history. The only difference is modern communication allows them to conspire in a more efficient manner. People in the field of climate science are probably the most paranoid “experts” on the planet. Think of the advancements in all other fields of science, and then there’s this group, who still can’t get the weather right even one week away and often bomb out on a three day forecast. Thanks to the garbage in….garbage out computer input they can now tell us that the sky is falling but reverting to 3rd world status and taxing the air we breathe is the ticket to controlling mother nature. Not really their fault that people are stupid enough to believe it. Job security as long as the sky is falling and politicians are on board because the ability to tax nothing does not come around very often.