Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
17-10-2019, 18:00   #5971
JJayoo
Registered User
 
JJayoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,696
Damn he kicked that lad right in the head, not gonna end well.

I think these protests are beyond stupid, oh let's target public transport....what?

But at the same time I think banning the protests is absolutely ridiculous, why not allow protests in parks/open spaces? Surely a middle ground is better than is nonsense
JJayoo is online now  
(2) thanks from:
Advertisement
17-10-2019, 18:34   #5972
windy shepard henderson
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,803
Mod: GAA, ZTest
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJayoo View Post
Damn he kicked that lad right in the head, not gonna end well.

I think these protests are beyond stupid, oh let's target public transport....what?

But at the same time I think banning the protests is absolutely ridiculous, why not allow protests in parks/open spaces? Surely a middle ground is better than is nonsense
The worst thing to do in terms of any climate change protest or policy is to interfere with the ordinary Joe trying to earn a living

These people if we're delayed at work would have been docked wages because of these dole merchants so next time maybe stay out of the normal guys way when protesting
windy shepard henderson is offline  
(2) thanks from:
17-10-2019, 18:37   #5973
KyussB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 737
Wow the threads gone full on anti-science now, in recent pages...

That's usually where the denialists try to drag discussions: Try to make science just a matter of opinion, so they can shoehorn in discredited 'scientists' (typically with no background in climate science) who back their political views.
KyussB is offline  
(2) thanks from:
17-10-2019, 19:14   #5974
Pa ElGrande
Registered User
 
Pa ElGrande's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyussB View Post
Wow the threads gone full on anti-science now, in recent pages...

That's usually where the denialists try to drag discussions: Try to make science just a matter of opinion, so they can shoehorn in discredited 'scientists' (typically with no background in climate science) who back their political views.

Pa ElGrande is offline  
17-10-2019, 23:33   #5975
moonage
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyussB View Post
Wow the threads gone full on anti-science now, in recent pages...

That's usually where the denialists try to drag discussions: Try to make science just a matter of opinion, so they can shoehorn in discredited 'scientists' (typically with no background in climate science) who back their political views.
Making science just a matter of opinion to back their political views?

Hmm, it sounds a bit like the IPCC process.
moonage is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
18-10-2019, 00:41   #5976
Tell me how
Registered User
 
Tell me how's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 9,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonage View Post
Making science just a matter of opinion to back their political views?

Hmm, it sounds a bit like the IPCC process.
Does it? In what way?

Why do you doubt the integrity of the process and the contributors?

What part of the report have you an issue with?
Tell me how is offline  
(2) thanks from:
18-10-2019, 02:59   #5977
KyussB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 737
The IPCC is the the authority on the scientific consensus on climate change - that's literally the entire point of its existence: To gather and report on the scientific consensus on climate change, which it does with the full support of the vast vast majority of climate scientists and institutions involved in climate science.

Questioning the content of specific parts of their reports is one thing - that's fair game - trying to portray the IPCC as merely producing opinion-based or politically motivated reports: That's Science Denialism. You might as well be a fucking astrologist or homeopath - that's where it leaves your own credibility...
KyussB is offline  
18-10-2019, 09:58   #5978
Fr_Dougal
Registered User
 
Fr_Dougal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Dougal View Post
People still banging on about the non-peer reviewed flawed IPCC report? Yeah?

It’s the equivalent of picking a report by a flat earther and constantly using it as evidence.

But it’s in the report, derp.

The report is flawed, the scientists have even admitted it.

But it’s in the report, derp derp.

It’s not peer reviewed.

But it’s in the report, derp derp derp.

Do you have any other evidence?

But the report derp, derp.

Okaaaay then...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tell me how View Post
So, where do you go to for information you trust?
What parts of the report are false? Links please.


Derp?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tell me how View Post
Does it? In what way?

Why do you doubt the integrity of the process and the contributors?

What part of the report have you an issue with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyussB View Post
The IPCC is the the authority on the scientific consensus on climate change - that's literally the entire point of its existence: To gather and report on the scientific consensus on climate change, which it does with the full support of the vast vast majority of climate scientists and institutions involved in climate science.

Questioning the content of specific parts of their reports is one thing - that's fair game - trying to portray the IPCC as merely producing opinion-based or politically motivated reports: That's Science Denialism. You might as well be a fucking astrologist or homeopath - that's where it leaves your own credibility...

It’s like a broken record at this point.

Someone refers to the IPCC report, asks which parts are false, gets a response and completely ignores it. Then asks the very same question again a few pages later.

‘la la la, fingers in my ears, I can’t hear you”

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...postcount=5856
Fr_Dougal is offline  
18-10-2019, 10:45   #5979
biko
Arbiter
 
biko's Avatar
IPCC scientist Micheal Mann went to court with another scientist, Tim Ball

Mann is director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University

Ball is a former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg and author of numerous books on climate science.

Quote:
In 2011, climate scientists Michael Mann filed a libel claim against Timothy (“Tim”) Ball, The Frontier Centre for Public Policy, Inc., and an unnamed defendant (“John Doe”). The defendant Ball participated in an interview with the FCPP and John Doe during which Ball made false and defamatory statements inferring that Michael Mann is guilty of criminal fraud in relation to the alleged “Climategate” scandal or alternatively that there are probably grounds to find Mann guilty.

The plaintiff sought damages, an injunction against further publication of the defamatory statements, and a court order for the defendants to remove the interview containing the defamatory statements from all electronic databases, including the FCPP website. In June 2019, the FCPP settled with Mann and issued a retraction and apology on their website.

According to the media and statements from Michael Mann and his lawyer, on August 22, 2019, the court dismissed the case on account of delay.
This dismissal was apparently responsive to Ball’s request which stressed his poor health.
http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitu...-and-john-doe/
biko is offline  
Advertisement
18-10-2019, 11:42   #5980
Pa ElGrande
Registered User
 
Pa ElGrande's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by biko View Post
IPCC scientist Micheal Mann went to court with another scientist, Tim Ball

Mann is director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University

Ball is a former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg and author of numerous books on climate science.


http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitu...-and-john-doe/

This is the key part "According to the media and statements from Michael Mann and his lawyer . ." What about Timothy Balls opinion? He was also awarded costs by the court which should be a strong indicator why Mann lost his case. I've been following this since its inception in 2011. This case was an attempt by Michael Mann and his lawyers using a technique known as strategic lawsuit against public participation against Timothy Ball.

Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann

Quote:
As Dr Ball explains:

“Michael Mann moved for an adjournment of the trial scheduled for February 20, 2017. We had little choice because Canadian courts always grant adjournments before a trial in their belief that an out of court settlement is preferable. We agreed to an adjournment with conditions. The major one was that he [Mann] produce all documents including computer codes by February 20th, 2017. He failed to meet the deadline.”

source

Mann lost his own case because of his own obstruction and has been ordered by the court to pay Tim Balls legal costs. You can read the judges opinion here. The judge took factors such as Mr. Balls age and the death of witnesses on Mr. Balls behalf into account in his dismissal, that was not the primary reason.


Michael Mann also has a case against Mark Steyn that has been dragging on for several years as well. He does not seem to be in a hurry to settle that one either. That will rumble on for a while as well.


Manns work is discredited because his Hockey Stick model wiped out both the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age, both of which were well documented in history, literature, art and science. His unwillingness to release his data and model so others could attempt to duplicate his results took this from the realm of science to mere political activity.
Pa ElGrande is offline  
18-10-2019, 14:41   #5981
Venom
Registered User
 
Venom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1998
Posts: 6,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllForIt View Post
https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1184745642905755649

Appols if this has been posted already.

I think I said on this thread some time ago that there is bound to be backlash against these protesters which is exactly what the above looks like to me. Someone is going to get hurt. These kinds of demonstrations are unprecedented, it's not like they are just marching thought the streets in a one-off way.

The thing about these ppl is that they just have that 'nutty' aurora about them even if their heart is in the right place. Aren't trains supposed to be more eco friendly than cars use btw. How exactly do ER expect ppl to get to work if not by train or not by car.

I saw a couple of videos taken at the train station that ER were protesting at yesterday and I'm totally at a loss for understanding what they were trying to accomplish? The trains in question ER delayed were electric trains so what's the problem?
Venom is online now  
Thanks from:
18-10-2019, 15:34   #5982
Tell me how
Registered User
 
Tell me how's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 9,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by biko View Post
IPCC scientist Micheal Mann went to court with another scientist, Tim Ball
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pa ElGrande View Post
This is the key part "According to the media and statements from Michael Mann and his lawyer . ." What about Timothy Balls opinion?
The publication in which Balls words on Mann were printed issued an apology to Mann so you could equally argue that they agreed with him that Ball was incorrect to say what he said. The case being dismissed was done due to delay which is different to suggesting it was a frivolous case in the first place.

Mann was a lead scientist on an IPCC report 18 years ago? Is that what you're trying to use to discredit the current publication? Is it really expected that with so many scientists involved with the IPCC that there will not be some who have had their work commented on in such ways as this.

What about the 'no issue with climate' side, given the absence of large bodies of scientists saying climate change is not an issue, we have to revert to 'notable others'.

Who do you want to discuss? Donald Trump? The Healy-Raes? Jeremy Clarkson? I mean, all of these are sensible, logical people aren't they, we'd never find any evidence of them to discredit their opinions I'm sure.
Tell me how is offline  
Thanks from:
18-10-2019, 16:08   #5983
jackboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tell me how View Post
What about the 'no issue with climate' side, given the absence of large bodies of scientists saying climate change is not an issue, we have to revert to 'notable others'..
Why would anyone say such a thing. Catastrophic climate change (whether man made or not) is pretty much certain in the long run.
jackboy is offline  
18-10-2019, 16:11   #5984
Tell me how
Registered User
 
Tell me how's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 9,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackboy View Post
Why would anyone say such a thing. Catastrophic climate change (whether man made or not) is pretty much certain in the long run.
Some in this thread would query that.
Tell me how is offline  
18-10-2019, 16:20   #5985
Pa ElGrande
Registered User
 
Pa ElGrande's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tell me how View Post
. . .
Mann was a lead scientist on an IPCC report 18 years ago? Is that what you're trying to use to discredit the current publication? Is it really expected that with so many scientists involved with the IPCC that there will not be some who have had their work commented on in such ways as this.
. . . .

I'm still waiting for you to share the data with us, you would not stoop as low as Michael Mann and not share the data now would you?

Michael Mann also claimed he was awarded the Nobel peace prize, until he was put right on the matter by the IPCC no less.

Keep in mind the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) are a committee they are not experts on climate and their remit is ONLY to report on climate change that can be attributed to humans, meaning there is bias in their reports.

The shoddy methods and antics of the IPCC process are described in the book The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert. I am registered as a reviewer for Working Group I of the future IPCC AR6 reports and you can be too. You have until the 13th December if you want to get in on working group II.

I had to agree to this

Quote:
Self Declaration of Expertise

I declare that I have scientific, technical or socioeconomic expertise in one or more areas relevant to the report and am therefore qualified to serve as an Expert Reviewer on the chapter(s) indicated.
Pa ElGrande is offline  
(2) thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet