climate change forecast?

2»

Comments

  • Slapshot
    Slapshot Posts: 211
    verylonglegs wrote:
    Slapshot wrote:
    verylonglegs wrote:

    What about performance related pay based on accuracy? :P

    Yeah right, don;t believe everything the Daily Mail tells you, personally i haven't had a pay rise at the rate of inflation for 5 years never mind PRP and bonuses

    Woah there, just a jest..wasn't aware anything had been written about it.

    Sorry, it's a very sore subject among us workers. The daily mail wiould like you to believe we are responsible for the massive bonus budget within the MOD, not us!!
    http://justcycling.myfastforum.org
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    Seanos wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    Like this?
    Not really, you linked to a news report, not to the actual study or the IPCC report it was included in.

    Life's too short :roll:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • Seanos
    Seanos Posts: 301
    daviesee wrote:
    Seanos wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    Like this?
    Not really, you linked to a news report, not to the actual study or the IPCC report it was included in.

    Life's too short :roll:
    Certainly is. Luckily I can save some time in future by ignoring your posts because I know you can't be bothered to present any facts to back up your arguments.
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    Seanos wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    Seanos wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    Like this?
    Not really, you linked to a news report, not to the actual study or the IPCC report it was included in.

    Life's too short :roll:
    Certainly is. Luckily I can save some time in future by ignoring your posts because I know you can't be bothered to present any facts to back up your arguments.

    Facts presented as per your last request.

    If you want to research the background be my guest.

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&so ... =&gs_rfai=

    I am not your researcher. :roll:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • Seanos
    Seanos Posts: 301
    daviesee wrote:
    Facts presented as per your last request.
    You said your problem was with 'some scientists presenting probabilitypredictions as facts' (sic). I asked for an example but you linked to an irrelevant news report. Now you've linked to an irrlelevant google search.

    I'm not asking you to do any 'research'. Just provide an example of where scientists present 'probabilitypredictions as facts'. If you have a problem with this then surely you must have come across some examples, maybe some studies without error bars?
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    [quote its all a load of bollocks.[/quote]
  • wicked
    wicked Posts: 844
    frinkmakesyouthink wrote:
    wicked wrote:
    I would not worry about it. The fact is scientists have not a clue what is going to happen next week never mind years into the future.

    Long-term trends are far far far easier to predict than short-term specifics.

    You simply don't know what you're talking about.

    Prove it.
    A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I do not know what the weather or climate is going to do. Neither do you. Neither do the 'scientists'.
    So there! :P
    It’s the most beautiful sport in the world but it’s governed by ***ts who have turned it into a crock of ****.

Categories