Climate Change

[aveatry]

88,000 peer reviewed articles/studies with multiple authors, many over ten.

The 8800 papers figure apart from not even being one hundred thousand let along 100s of thousands they are papers over 13 years so that is 6,778 papers per year.

Just admit you pulled the hundreds of thousands figure out of the air or just lied about it.

 

[aveatry]

Leave him to it, he is trolling.

Just calling out liers

 

[aveatry]

But what is a climate scientist. How many of those papers were only tangentially related to climate research. And how many repeat authors are there. It would be strange for a scientist to only write one paper over a period of ten years. The Quora discussion I linked to is actually very interesting. The participants estimate anything from a few hundred scientists to perhaps twenty five thousand, depending on how you define a climate scientist.

Yep 25000 if you squint from a distance does look like hundreds of thousands

 

[denso13]

so that is 6,778 papers per year.

And about 18 and a half a day. So what.

 

[aveatry]

And about 18 and a half a day. So what.

You are basing proof of your claim on 88000 papers and that there are multiple scientists per paper to get you over the 100,000 mark. But the 88000 is over 13 years so you would need 15 scientists per paper to get over 100,000. And the same scientist are probably on more than one paper.
However you look at it you cannot get to over 100,000 let alone the 200,00 minimum of your claim. Hundreds of thousands- remember is your claim. Oh you can't argue with hundreds of thousands of climate scientist -- no you can't especially if they don't exist

 

[noseall]

You are basing proof of your claim on 88000 papers and that there are multiple scientists per paper

And the small matter of the fact that the climate is rapidly changing, with the proof out there for all to see.

 

[noseall]

Just calling out liers

Untitled

• noseall
• 17 Jan 2015
• 3

 

[denso13]

And the same scientist are probably on more than one paper.

Probably? I gave you their names for goodness sake, check them out.

 

[aveatry]

And the small matter of the fact that the climate is rapidly changing, with the proof out there for all to see.

I am not denying that though am I so you are brown-nosing the wrong subject

 

[aveatry]

Probably? I gave you their names for goodness sake, check them out.

You gave me 200,000 climate scientist names did you.
Even NMW67 can only come up with 25000 at best and we know what he's like when it comes to Google

 

[MNW67]

and we know what he's like when it comes to Google

I don't know whether that's supposed to be an insult or a compliment.

 

[denso13]

You gave me 200,000 climate scientist names did you.
Even NMW67 can only come up with 25000 at best and we know what he's like when it comes to Google

Check them out

 

[aveatry]

I don't know whether that's supposed to be an insult or a compliment.

A compliment, you leave no stone unturned.
And can only come up with 25000. Just 175,000 short of densos claim so almost there.

 

[aveatry]

Looks like NASA thinks the the whole climate thing is BS and a waste of their time and resources.

NASA's purpose is the exploration of space — not Earth's climate. "We're going to move aside all of the climate science All of the science that we do is going to be directed towards exploration, which is the mission of NASA. That's why we have NASA, is to explore, not to do all of these earth sciences," ----Acting NASA Administrator

 

[pete01]

Looks like NASA thinks the the whole climate thing is BS

I agree with NASA