How newsworthy is this accidental death? People die all the time from a variety of mishaps. So why the focus on this one? You need to connect the dots for me.ant wrote:About 5 minutes.geo wrote:Jesus, how much time do you spend every day just looking for stuff like this? It boggles the mind.ant wrote:Here's a story about some "experts" that caused the death of a 19 year old girl that was used as a ginnie pig for an environmental air quality experiment.
https://junksciencecom.files.wordpress. ... office.pdf
Anyone hear about this?
Harry,
I'm sorry your worldview justifies something like this.
(am I being presumptuous?)
It boogles the mind just how much isn't reported in mainstream ideologically biased news, huh?
-
In total there are 22 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 22 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 813 on Mon Apr 15, 2024 11:52 pm
Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4781
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2198 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
[/quote]
How newsworthy is this accidental death? People die all the time from a variety of mishaps. So why the focus on this one? You need to connect the dots for me.[/quote]
A MISHAP??!
Is that your daily euphemism for us?
An environmental health climate study done on a human being that results in the death of said Human Being is a "mishap"
And we achieved exactly what in return for this "mishap" Geo?
Where's the empathy here?
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!
How newsworthy is this accidental death? People die all the time from a variety of mishaps. So why the focus on this one? You need to connect the dots for me.[/quote]
A MISHAP??!
Is that your daily euphemism for us?
An environmental health climate study done on a human being that results in the death of said Human Being is a "mishap"
And we achieved exactly what in return for this "mishap" Geo?
Where's the empathy here?
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited by ant on Mon Aug 24, 2015 5:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4781
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2198 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
How newsworthy is this accidental death? People die all the time from a variety of mishaps. So why the focus on this one? You need to connect the dots for me.[/quote]ant wrote:
A MISHAP??!
Is that your daily euphemism for us?
An environmental health climate study done on a human being that results in the death of said Human Being is a "mishap"
And we achieved exactly what in return for this "mishap" Geo?
Where's the empathy here?
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!![/quote]
I don't enough details to make such judgements. Either do you. From the article:
"The cause of death has not yet been determined, pending the examination and report of the county medical examiner."
It sounds to me like a routine medical procedure which typically has a low risk. The patient may have had an adverse reaction. Again, why are you posting this here? What is your point?
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
Read the rest of the article/Mr. Jackson said the university's inquiry showed that her death apparently involved "an
unusually high dosage of lidocaine. high enough to be potentially fatal." Lidocaine is a
topical anesthetic applied inside the throat to suppress the gag reflex induced by the
procedure, in which a flexible fiber optic bronchoscope is used to obtain brush biopsies
from tissue in the lower lobe of the lungs
There's pretty darn good indicators it's related directly to the experiments, Geo.
It's appalling that you're dismissing it as not newsworthy because the med exam report hasn't been read by you.
my goodness. geeezz
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4781
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2198 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
Okay, so it was an accidental death which resulted from incompetence or human error or maybe even malice. We don't really know at this point. But again, what is your point? Why do I have to keep asking the same question? You're the one who posted the article. Why is this news report relevant?ant wrote:Read the rest of the article/Mr. Jackson said the university's inquiry showed that her death apparently involved "an
unusually high dosage of lidocaine. high enough to be potentially fatal." Lidocaine is a
topical anesthetic applied inside the throat to suppress the gag reflex induced by the
procedure, in which a flexible fiber optic bronchoscope is used to obtain brush biopsies
from tissue in the lower lobe of the lungs
There's pretty darn good indicators it's related directly to the experiments, Geo.
It's appalling that you're dismissing it as not newsworthy because the med exam report hasn't been read by you.
my goodness. geeezz
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
Can someone please please tell me what we're NOT going to blame on global warming?
http://m.sfgate.com/science/article/Mys ... 458563.php
http://m.sfgate.com/science/article/Mys ... 458563.php
- Harry Marks
-
Bookasaurus
- Posts: 1920
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 10:42 am
- 12
- Location: Denver, CO
- Has thanked: 2335 times
- Been thanked: 1020 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
It is a straightforward implication of the website's interpretation of their analysis. Do you detect some problem with it? Do you understand the idea of cycles? Have you looked at the "cycles vs. data" graphs on the website? If the departure from cycle is GHG driven, then we add it to the up part of the cycle, as well as the down part. The result looks like the Al Gore hockey stick graph, but with a pause.ant wrote: Is this a prediction based on past observation? Has it been tested? Is this your opinion?
Scientists are people. They will explain their models if people want to understand.
I am not the one quoting crank websites. What motivates you to go find the smoke being put out by the denialists? A confused worldview.
You're losing it here like some crazy-ass cult leader.
No, I did not ignore them, I pointed out that they are not integral parts of the basic model which implies that we need to do something about warming. Instead they are tangential efforts to make the models more accurate and comprehensive. This is a good thing - no mistakes would mean no one is publishing at the learning stage, but instead everyone is waiting until their model predictions are confirmed by experience. That would not be science. It would also mean, because of the cumulative effect of CO2 emissions, that it is too late to avoid losing the ice caps.I can list (and have linked to a list) all the crazy climate disaster predictions that have NOT come to pass, that were made by climate "experts"
You've ignored them. .
Do this. Make a list of mistakes whose correction reinforces the need to act. Find out which things the models "got wrong" by being too conservative. You could start with tundra methane and proceed to ice cap melting. Ocean acidification is another. A mistake is going to be random in effect - some will overstate the reason for concern, some will understate it. Classifying one side as evidence of bias is itself evidence of bias.
Or just stick to your confirmation bias, and get more info from the echo chamber for denialists.
- Robert Tulip
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6502
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
- 18
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 2721 times
- Been thanked: 2665 times
- Contact:
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
Hi Harry, glad to see your pig singing teaching efforts. You are more patient than me. Here is a more successful exampleHarry Marks wrote:I am not the one quoting crank websites.
- Harry Marks
-
Bookasaurus
- Posts: 1920
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 10:42 am
- 12
- Location: Denver, CO
- Has thanked: 2335 times
- Been thanked: 1020 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
Sounds to me like it has more to do with why anesthesiologists have such high malpractice insurance rates than it is revealing about climate science.ant wrote:"an
unusually high dosage of lidocaine. high enough to be potentially fatal." Lidocaine is a
topical anesthetic used to suppress the gag reflex induced by the procedure
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: Matt Ridley, "The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science"
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate ... 1429832149Even the U.N. doesn’t agree with him on that one: In its 2012 Special Report on Extreme Events, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says there is “high agreement” among leading experts that long-term trends in weather disasters are not attributable to human-caused climate change