or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by muppetry

No - based on opinion. Uninformed opinion. OK - well uneducated guess. Prejudiced, uneducated guess.
I'm irritated by your inability to comprehend even simple scientific concepts, by your attempts to pronounce on subjects of which you demonstrate complete ignorance, and by your resort to what I assume you think are clever sounding cryptic comments in response to detailed explanations of why you are completely wrong. I'm additionally irritated now because obviously I'm arguing with a kid, something I somehow failed to pick up on earlier. 
I'm not playing silly games of riddles with you. Either present your arguments or don't. 
Cold fusion was not discovered, because it doesn't exist. Despite the obvious flaws in the original work, the process of science took over and other groups attempted to replicate the results in case current theory was wrong, and it was really possible. It wasn't. So this is actually almost a perfect counter-example to the point that you are trying to make. Par for the course.
I'm sorry, but you don't get to rewrite the physics behind EM interactions with matter just because it doesn't fit with the nonsense that you have read about this subject. So you understood wrong, as both measurement and calculation would show you if you were not too lazy to read and comprehend the literature.And quit with the stupid references to linearity, which you obviously don't even remotely understand either. Of course it's not linear across all atmospheric...
 So I understand why that is an appealing point of view, but it is an oversimplification. You have made no effort to estimate the random or systematic errors in your measurement of the actual air temperature, nor whether local effects need to be taken into account if your measurements are to be used in assessing a time-resolved, geographically-averaged local temperature. The analysis methods address those issues and, as more information and better techniques are developed,...
Now you have transitioned seamlessly to stating your preconceptions about me? That doesn't help your argument either - just speaks to a pattern of weakness in your thinking. Just as a reminder on what I posted previously, I think that this was quite possibly racial profiling, but I detest the lazy thinking that leads to the kinds of posts littering this thread asserting that  racism is the only possible explanation.
It's the only answer that fits your preconception of the event, would be more accurate I think. 
I assume you mean the composite graphics that you posted? It's really difficult to figure out what those show, with misaligned axes and no detail, in most cases, on what is being displayed. Part of the problem, I suspect, is that you are automatically rejecting any refinement of analysis as falsification. You make one interesting statement though:  That would be very interesting if true - do you have a citation for it? And - check PMs.
So what are you suggesting - that in the absence of knowing the answer to that important question, we should just assume racism?
New Posts  All Forums: