|
Post by gadreel on Jan 20, 2020 23:34:49 GMT
Of course it's not winter in Australia.Actually Arlon lets do it this way, please present one argument against Global Warming, just one at a time, see if you can stick to the facts and back up what you say with evidence, not your personal website. I want to see if you can actually present a cogent case As usual you're missing the point. The point is that a colder atmosphere is a drier one, whatever the season. Most people know this because it is in winter that they have more difficulty with dry skin. If you don't yourself you can consult sales data on skin moisturizers. That it is currently summer in Australia doesn't explain why the air is dry, neither does anything you have to say about it. Yet you have the audacity to ask me to be cogent. The atmospheric temperature in increasing not decreasing. But hey lets see your evidence of your claim, can you provide any evidence that there are higher sales in skin moisturizers? And please be sure to remove the data where the sales increase in summer because people need to recover from sun burn. Actually Arlon lets do it this way, please present one argument against Global Warming, just one at a time, see if you can stick to the facts and back up what you say with evidence, not your personal website. I want to see if you can actually present a cogent case
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 21, 2020 0:02:40 GMT
As usual you're missing the point. The point is that a colder atmosphere is a drier one, whatever the season. Most people know this because it is in winter that they have more difficulty with dry skin. If you don't yourself you can consult sales data on skin moisturizers. That it is currently summer in Australia doesn't explain why the air is dry, neither does anything you have to say about it. Yet you have the audacity to ask me to be cogent. The atmospheric temperature in increasing not decreasing. But hey lets see your evidence of your claim, can you provide any evidence that there are higher sales in skin moisturizers? And please be sure to remove the data where the sales increase in summer because people need to recover from sun burn. Actually Arlon lets do it this way, please present one argument against Global Warming, just one at a time, see if you can stick to the facts and back up what you say with evidence, not your personal website. I want to see if you can actually present a cogent case You still do not understand statistical analysis. It can "indicate" (not prove) people need more skin moisturizer in colder weather as compared to warmer weather the same year. Year to year sales involve far too many variables to "indicate" very much. I discussed that at length regarding cancer rates over the many years. You still don't get it. Was it you or Eva Yojimbo who said statistical analysis was as good as any science? Bayes' Theorem no less? The absurdity of your request for me to prove that colder weather means drier air shows that you are apparently cut off from normal human beings many of whom could readily verify the case. Let's see if you can actually contact anyone. It is important for you to understand that I do not care what you consider "evidence" or "proof" since you are obviously hopelessly opposed to anything that doesn't support your misconceptions.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 21, 2020 0:08:26 GMT
The atmospheric temperature in increasing not decreasing. But hey lets see your evidence of your claim, can you provide any evidence that there are higher sales in skin moisturizers? And please be sure to remove the data where the sales increase in summer because people need to recover from sun burn. Actually Arlon lets do it this way, please present one argument against Global Warming, just one at a time, see if you can stick to the facts and back up what you say with evidence, not your personal website. I want to see if you can actually present a cogent case You still do not understand statistical analysis. It can "indicate" (not prove) people need more skin moisturizer in colder weather as compared to warmer weather the same year. Year to year sales involve far too many variables to "indicate" very much. I discussed that at length regarding cancer rates over the many years. You still don't get it. Was it you or Eva Yojimbo who said statistical analysis was as good as any science? Bayes' Theorem no less? The absurdity of your request for me to prove that colder weather means drier air shows that you are apparently cut off from normal human beings many of whom could readily verify the case. Let's see if you can actually contact anyone. It is important for you to understand that I do not care what you consider "evidence" or "proof" since you are obviously hopelessly opposed to anything that doesn't support your misconceptions. I must confess that I secretly knew you would be unable to back up the bullshit you are spouting, I just wanted to see how far you were going to push your stupidity on this matter, it seems the answer is 'to tedious extremes' Your permise is that there is less moisture in the air, which is a great strawman because it was never even suggested until you brought it up, however as usual the facts are contrary to your claims. skepticalscience.com/humidity-global-warming.htmThe article specifically calls out the tropics. Please dazzle me with the bull shit you use to justify dismissing this.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 21, 2020 0:28:01 GMT
You still do not understand statistical analysis. It can "indicate" (not prove) people need more skin moisturizer in colder weather as compared to warmer weather the same year. Year to year sales involve far too many variables to "indicate" very much. I discussed that at length regarding cancer rates over the many years. You still don't get it. Was it you or Eva Yojimbo who said statistical analysis was as good as any science? Bayes' Theorem no less? The absurdity of your request for me to prove that colder weather means drier air shows that you are apparently cut off from normal human beings many of whom could readily verify the case. Let's see if you can actually contact anyone. It is important for you to understand that I do not care what you consider "evidence" or "proof" since you are obviously hopelessly opposed to anything that doesn't support your misconceptions. I must confess that I secretly knew you would be unable to back up the bullshit you are spouting, I just wanted to see how far you were going to push your stupidity on this matter, it seems the answer is 'to tedious extremes' Your permise is that there is less moisture in the air, which is a great strawman because it was never even suggested until you brought it up, however as usual the facts are contrary to your claims. skepticalscience.com/humidity-global-warming.htmThe article specifically calls out the tropics. Please dazzle me with the bull shit you use to justify dismissing this. You have finally persuaded me that the papers you often link were indeed written by scientists. Not the way you think though. They were written as traps for people like you to fall in. You have time and time again. The rather obvious problem with the most recent one is the same ridiculous one with "global" temperature. The "population" (entirety of the atmospheric data in this case) is far too vast in comparison to the sample size. It cannot possibly give accurate results. Your sources and you do provide a valuable social service. You show children they need to turn off the internet and follow their teachers' directions to understand the world. Be careful though, some very poor schools might get filled teachers that obviously stupid.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 21, 2020 0:35:53 GMT
I must confess that I secretly knew you would be unable to back up the bullshit you are spouting, I just wanted to see how far you were going to push your stupidity on this matter, it seems the answer is 'to tedious extremes' Your permise is that there is less moisture in the air, which is a great strawman because it was never even suggested until you brought it up, however as usual the facts are contrary to your claims. skepticalscience.com/humidity-global-warming.htmThe article specifically calls out the tropics. Please dazzle me with the bull shit you use to justify dismissing this. You have finally persuaded me that the papers you often link were indeed written by scientists. Not the way you think though. They were written as traps for people like you to fall in. You have time and time again. The rather obvious problem with the most recent one is the same ridiculous one with "global" temperature. The "population" (entirety of the atmospheric data in this case) is far too vast in comparison to the sample size. It cannot possibly give accurate results. Your sources and you do provide a valuable social service. You show children they need to turn off the internet and follow their teachers' directions to understand the world. Be careful though, some very poor schools might get filled teachers that obviously stupid. I take it then you went to a school with one of these 'filled teachers that obviously stupid'. That is an excellent point, tell me in the study that I linked what was the sample size? What kind of sample size do you think is sufficient to measure humidity over the tropics?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 21, 2020 0:44:36 GMT
You have finally persuaded me that the papers you often link were indeed written by scientists. Not the way you think though. They were written as traps for people like you to fall in. You have time and time again. The rather obvious problem with the most recent one is the same ridiculous one with "global" temperature. The "population" (entirety of the atmospheric data in this case) is far too vast in comparison to the sample size. It cannot possibly give accurate results. Your sources and you do provide a valuable social service. You show children they need to turn off the internet and follow their teachers' directions to understand the world. Be careful though, some very poor schools might get filled teachers that obviously stupid. I take it then you went to a school with one of these 'filled teachers that obviously stupid'. That is an excellent point, tell me in the study that I linked what was the sample size? What kind of sample size do you think is sufficient to measure humidity over the tropics? Here's the deal. I appreciate that you attempt to appear scientific. You do not, but at least I know you are not scientific with a high degree of certainty. I can spare myself wasting any time with your obviously misguided opinions. I would not hire you to clean my swimming pool. That's just an expression, I don't have one. The apartment complex where I live has one, but I doubt they'd hire you to clean it either. My friend's beagle knows cold air is drier. I'm sorry you might never know anything.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 21, 2020 0:53:44 GMT
I take it then you went to a school with one of these 'filled teachers that obviously stupid'. That is an excellent point, tell me in the study that I linked what was the sample size? What kind of sample size do you think is sufficient to measure humidity over the tropics? Here's the deal. I appreciate that you attempt to appear scientific. You do not, but at least I know you are not scientific with a high degree of certainty. I can spare myself wasting any time with your obviously misguided opinions. I would not hire you to clean my swimming pool. That's just an expression, I don't have one. The apartment complex where I live has one, but I doubt they'd hire you to clean it either. My friend's beagle knows cold air is drier. I'm sorry you might never know anything. Yup I thought you might dodge that one too. Fuck you are an idiot.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 21, 2020 0:58:12 GMT
Here's the deal. I appreciate that you attempt to appear scientific. You do not, but at least I know you are not scientific with a high degree of certainty. I can spare myself wasting any time with your obviously misguided opinions. I would not hire you to clean my swimming pool. That's just an expression, I don't have one. The apartment complex where I live has one, but I doubt they'd hire you to clean it either. My friend's beagle knows cold air is drier. I'm sorry you might never know anything. Yup I thought you might dodge that one too. Fuck you are an idiot. < video > I'm sure I'm not the first person to dodge you.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 21, 2020 1:02:33 GMT
Here's the deal. I appreciate that you attempt to appear scientific. You do not, but at least I know you are not scientific with a high degree of certainty. I can spare myself wasting any time with your obviously misguided opinions. I would not hire you to clean my swimming pool. That's just an expression, I don't have one. The apartment complex where I live has one, but I doubt they'd hire you to clean it either. My friend's beagle knows cold air is drier. I'm sorry you might never know anything. Yup I thought you might dodge that one too. Fuck you are an idiot.
Welcome to Planet Arlon. This is the place where Dunning Kruger reigns supreme and senior antiquated notions float across the airwaves of quasi science and old fashioned creationist anti-scientific religious fustiness.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 21, 2020 1:09:28 GMT
Yup I thought you might dodge that one too. Fuck you are an idiot. < video > I'm sure I'm not the first person to dodge you. You most certainly are not, although I suspect you are trying to be funny about my desirability.
I do find it funny that you make such claims of intelligence, but are too stupid to realise just how ridiculous you sound.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 21, 2020 1:57:26 GMT
I'm sure I'm not the first person to dodge you. You most certainly are not, although I suspect you are trying to be funny about my desirability.
I do find it funny that you make such claims of intelligence, but are too stupid to realise just how ridiculous you sound.
There's a lot of that going around.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 21, 2020 2:19:22 GMT
You most certainly are not, although I suspect you are trying to be funny about my desirability.
I do find it funny that you make such claims of intelligence, but are too stupid to realise just how ridiculous you sound.
There's a lot of that going around. oo look another attempt at derision. You really are kind of pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jan 21, 2020 2:29:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 21, 2020 11:18:58 GMT
There's a lot of that going around. oo look another attempt at derision. You really are kind of pathetic. Seriously? Derision? I would say longanimity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 12:15:17 GMT
I don't care for Pentecostals... They're a shower of bastards.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 21, 2020 13:55:37 GMT
The atmospheric temperature in increasing not decreasing. But hey lets see your evidence of your claim, can you provide any evidence that there are higher sales in skin moisturizers? And please be sure to remove the data where the sales increase in summer because people need to recover from sun burn. Actually Arlon lets do it this way, please present one argument against Global Warming, just one at a time, see if you can stick to the facts and back up what you say with evidence, not your personal website. I want to see if you can actually present a cogent case Was it you or Eva Yojimbo who said statistical analysis was as good as any science? Bayes' Theorem no less? I never said any such thing. What I said was that Bayes's Theorem models how scientific reasoning works. It's the logic underlying the scientific method. I even linked you to a textbook fully explaining this, which, of course, you ignored. Science without proper reasoning from the evidence it produces is absolutely useless. For those interested (ie, not Arlon), one of the real breakthroughs in statistics in the past 30 years is the revelation that it is, indeed, sometimes possible to infer causation from statistics alone (ie, without randomized controlled experiments). The full textbook explanation is here: bayes.cs.ucla.edu/BOOK-2K/book-toc.html but it's extremely dense and beyond your average person. For more gentle intros (still with math; there's no way to understand this without it), try these: medium.com/@akelleh/a-technical-primer-on-causality-181db2575e41www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/if-correlation-doesnt-imply-causation-then-what-does/www.lesswrong.com/posts/hzuSDMx7pd2uxFc5w/causal-diagrams-and-causal-models
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jan 21, 2020 18:15:08 GMT
I don't care for Pentecostals... They're a shower of bastards. The ones I've crossed paths with haven't been that bad, but they're hopelessly indoctrinated into Rapture doctrine, and I fear it's going to cost them someday. It's going to cost a lot of folks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 18:20:35 GMT
I don't care for Pentecostals... They're a shower of bastards. The ones I've crossed paths with haven't been that bad, but they're hopelessly indoctrinated into Rapture doctrine, and I fear it's going to cost them someday. It's going to cost a lot of folks. They are clearly radio rental... Can't stand them. They really are indoctrinated, and the opposite of all Christ's teachings. The feeling is mutual by the way. They call Catholicism 'New Babylon', and believe it's their mission to 'save' as many Catholics as possible from our wicked ways before their fictional rapture happens. Shower of bastards.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jan 21, 2020 18:44:07 GMT
I been telling y'all for decades that the lunatics are in charge of the asylum, but do you listen to me? Nooooooooooooooo!
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 21, 2020 19:06:46 GMT
oo look another attempt at derision. You really are kind of pathetic. Seriously? Derision? I would say longanimity. What is hilarious is that you probably would.
|
|