• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Event Horizon predicted Deepwater Horizon disaster

Into the Night said:
I already know for the commonly used antibiotics, pain killers, blood pressure medicines, etc. For those medications, the doctor and the pharmacist also know, using the same criteria. These medications have been tested according to my criteria already.
Click to expand...

How do you know? Did you look at the data yourself? Or did you rely on other people to determine the truth? If you don't trust the government scientists on global warming why do you trust the government bureaucrats at the FDA?
 
Into the Night said:
Nope. Neither one has performed the required margin of error calculation or provided the selection by randN, as is required by statistical analysis.

No, they haven't done it.

Sure it does. You and the Church of Global Warming depends on them.

I actually HAVE looked much further than anyone from the Church of Green or the Church of Global Warming has.

Science is not a method. It is not a government agency either. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

The data you claimed doesn't even exist. Other 'data' that I dispute is the global temperature record (no raw data available, no margin of error calculation, no selection by randN). Global sea level 'data' (no reference point). Global amounts of snow and ice (no raw data available). Global precipitation (no raw data). Satellite temperature data (no valid instrumentation). Global atmospheric CO2 content (no raw data, no margin of error calculation, no selection by randN). Any statement that violates physics (numerous), or mathematics (numerous).

NOAA used to publish the raw data from individual station logs, but they took that information down in 11/1/2016. It was conflicting with their published 'averages'. Neither NOAA nor NASA maintains thermometers outside their jurisdiction or even outside the lower 48 mainland States (Alaska and Hawaii do not have NOAA operated weather stations).

Neither NOAA nor NASA maintain any data on the effect of oil spills. NOAA maintains a partial dataset on oil spill incidents, that's all.
Click to expand...

FFS not another one of you guys... you seem to have taken for granted and assumed all kinds of crap about me that I have never said.

You will obviously never link to what you are talking about, just spew crap over and over as if you were in the conspiracy forum.
 
RobertU said:
How do you know? Did you look at the data yourself?
Click to expand...
Yes.
RobertU said:
Or did you rely on other people to determine the truth?
Click to expand...
No, I looked it up myself. I am also in instrument maker for the medical industry (that includes the manufacturing of pharmaceuticals.
RobertU said:
If you don't trust the government scientists
Click to expand...
I don't trust any scientist. Science isn't scientists. It is a set of falsifiable theories.
RobertU said:
on global warming
Click to expand...
Define 'global warming'. Science has no theories about meaingless buzzwords.
RobertU said:
why do you trust the government bureaucrats at the FDA?
Click to expand...
I don't.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
...deleted irrelevant portion..... you seem to have taken for granted and assumed all kinds of crap about me that I have never said.
Click to expand...
I used to go dig up denials of your own statements like this. I don't bother anymore. Anyone who wants to can go beck through the posts and see for themselves.
FreedomFromAll said:
You will obviously never link to what you are talking about,
Click to expand...
Holy Links are not a proof. If you want to find out about statistics and how it works, including the requirement for the margin of error calculation and its requirement for raw data, there is plenty of material to learn from.
FreedomFromAll said:
just spew crap over and over as if you were in the conspiracy forum.
Click to expand...
Mathematics, the laws of thermodynamics, and the Stefan-Boltzmann law is not crap.
 
Into the Night said:
I used to go dig up denials of your own statements like this. I don't bother anymore. Anyone who wants to can go beck through the posts and see for themselves.

Holy Links are not a proof. If you want to find out about statistics and how it works, including the requirement for the margin of error calculation and its requirement for raw data, there is plenty of material to learn from.

Mathematics, the laws of thermodynamics, and the Stefan-Boltzmann law is not crap.
Click to expand...

Well ok if you do not want to back what you were saying who am I to care.
 
On another news, Titanic 2.0 is ready to set sail soon. Maybe they should make sure they have enough lifeboats JUST IN CASE the history repeats itself, right? We don't want what happened to Jack and Rose happened to the new passengers if/when they hit another iceberg.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom