At some point the consensus will consist of maybe a half dozen people, and most of the press corpse will still refuse to listen to anyone else.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Is Antarctica Melting?
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Is Antarctica Melting?
- Gordon Vigurs on Is Antarctica Melting?
- Bob G on Is Antarctica Melting?
- conrad ziefle on High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Gordon Vigurs on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
97% of ‘climate experts’ who chew gum, recommend not walking at the same time.
PM Julia Gillard is a master of the art.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lCCnu-Jk9c
I’d still like to know why, with all the recent evidence, they still haven’t convinced the other 3 percent.
You’d think that they’d LOVE the chance to re-do their survey, and maybe convince people they’re making headway.
But if they got less than 97%, they lose. If they equaled 97%, they lose.
They could never claim 100% (all it would take is ONE scientist speaking out).
So they’re stuck somewhere between 97.1 and 99.9 percent.
And that range of 2.8 percent falls within the margin of error.
In science it only takes ONE person to be right.
If a paleoclimate paper in the woods fails R2 validation, is the skeptic still wrong?
😉