Man Law : The head nod is an acceptable way to greet another guy when simply walking past. No words are needed to be said. An upward nod is for friends, a downward nod is for fellow men.

RSS Feed

Prove it

Posted by ArmedGeek on Friday, November 27, 2009 in Politics, Rants

I ran across a discussion yesterday regarding Sean Hannity saying that this year was cooler than any year in recent history. The initial discussion started by essentially calling Hannity a liar and a moron because “the science was clear”. The obvious first response to this was, “Yes, but your science is flawed and corrupt.” I’m not going to bother linking to the discussion directly as I don’t think it is really relevant. The very same type of discussion can be found pretty much anywhere you look.

So currently, here is where we stand: We have two separate (known) incidences of intentional fraud coupled (or caused by) corrupt or just plain shitty original datasets. Pretty much all of the AGW studies have one aspect in common: they all refuse to “show their work”.

Studies have shown that too much text is boring and people tend to skim over it without reading.  Adding images is said to help focus the reader.

Studies have shown that too much text is boring and people tend to skim over it without reading. Adding images is said to help focus the reader.

I’m going to show my work. Currently, 100% of the known studies “proving” AGW theories have been shown to be corrupt (both the Hadley CRU and New Zealand studies). What these studies have in common, aside from “proving” AGW, is that they refused to release their original data or methodologies. So, lets apply what we now know to the rest of the AGW studies. We can hypothesize, based on our current data, that studies that refuse to release their initial data or their methodologies used to arrive at their conclusions are frauds and/or corrupt. All of our currently available data shows this to be fact.

I’ve made my hypothesis, revealed the data I used in my experiments, and explained my conclusion. So if there’s anyone out there that would like to “prove my theory wrong”, you actually have an opportunity to do just that. However, I also require that you follow these simple rules of science when you attempt to prove it.

So, the answer to AGW followers is simple: Prove it. Nope, sorry you cannot go grabbing more studies and graphs where the initial data and methodologies have been kept secret as I’ve just proved that those are fraudulent.

I’m a drunken redneck with a high school education able to put this together within minutes of climbing out of bed and I’ve still not yet had my coffee. Science really isn’t that fucking hard.

Bring on the comments

  1. Luckily, I am not one that “loses focus” while reading any kind of text.

    Don’t hold your breath waiting for any Goronites to counter your fine argument.

    :D

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. It was a little hard to concentrate on the text, but once I was able to read it, I have to agree with you 100%.

    The CRU emails are poking all kinds of holes in Al Bore’s AGW balloon.

    About damn time too.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Curtal Friar says:

    Um, text? There’s text to this entry? Damn, better go back and read it…

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. [...] Geek has a lay-man’s analysis here. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)The Harry_Read_Me FileAGW Postpones Baseball [...]

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. cbullitt says:

    Damn, Geek. You stopped over and didn’t check the spassfabrik? Are you out of liquor?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Nicole says:

    Everyone who has ever taken a test knows that you have to show your work or you fail. Guess maybe the standards have fallen a lot.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Moses says:

    I won’t lie, I started to read the text because of the boobs… Interesting post, thank you.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. LC Aggie Sith says:

    Leastways you are honest, Moses. Tried this argument with my liberal niece, and she was left spinning. It was rather cool to watch.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0