Ready for the next staged pandemic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter VonBonfire
  • Start date Start date
I don’t think there is really a distinction between data and statistics the way you’re describing. I think what you’re trying to say is that if each of the last 100 years is successively warmer, then it is almost a given that next year will be warmer. Two points: that’s still a prediction and I think you’re oversimplifying the methodologies and analytics used to collect temperature data.
 
Last edited:
Justin Bailey said:
Somewhat, but not really. Data is numbers. Raw numbers. Statistics uses data to bring a story into them.
Statistics imply inferences.


Feel free to disagree. I’m not up for any dopey faggotism from you guys tonight so enjoy!
Click to expand...
Dopey faggotism ? Rich coming from a guy who loves drag queen story hour as much as you do. :sneaky:


I do disagree. You're simply employing semantics, which is something you do often. Raw numbers ARE statistics, dope.
 
Justin Bailey said:
Somewhat, but not really. Data is numbers. Raw numbers. Statistics uses data to bring a story into them.
Statistics imply inferences.


Feel free to disagree. I’m not up for any dopey faggotism from you guys tonight so enjoy!
Click to expand...
Faggotism.. Hmmm...
That's the most reasonable written words I've seen you write..
Unfiltered, to the point and not politically correct..
I think we can be friends.. :thumbsup:
 
e9d2186c4eae3d6a.jpg
 
acceptance said:
I don’t think there is really a distinction between data and statistics the way you’re describing. I think what you’re trying to say is that if each of the last 100 years is successively warmer, then it is almost a given that next year will be warmer. Two points: that’s still a prediction and I think you’re oversimplifying the methodologies and analytics used to collect temperature data.
Click to expand...

“Global warming” doesn’t necessarily mean each year will be warmer than the next. It’s a trend that has a very specific starting point, that many different studies (collected data) from different scientific disciplines, have all came to the same conclusion over and over again.
A statistic puts a story behind the data, or inference as I said last night. Using the same data, statistics could range from “a rapid increase of carbon dioxide led to a rapid rise in global temps” all the way to “global temps have risen since ‘beard splitter’ stopped being a popular way to describe a ladies man”

Both are statistically accurate, but one has thousands of tests done to confirm the accuracy. The other is an inference. More simply put, a statistic can be true but misleading.

Back to the original point, I don’t put a lot of weight in “predictions” because they aren’t factual. Many may come true, but they are often objective. In a forum like this where “debates” rely on logical fallacies, it leaves it open for people to say things like “scientists predicted this, and it didn’t come true, so obviously they don’t understand the science” , which is of course fallacious. And lame
 
I think the "global warming" advocates forget that there is a fiery ball at the center of our universe. But no, CO2 is the problem.
 
Justin Bailey said:
Back to the original point, I don’t put a lot of weight in “predictions” because they aren’t factual. Many may come true, but they are often objective. In a forum like this where “debates” rely on logical fallacies, it leaves it open for people to say things like “scientists predicted this, and it didn’t come true, so obviously they don’t understand the science” , which is of course fallacious. And lame
Click to expand...
Predictions are essential to science though because they demonstrate the validity of the hypothesis.
 
acceptance said:
Predictions are essential to science though because they demonstrate the validity of the hypothesis.
Click to expand...

In the sense of predicting the outcome of an experiment, then I would agree. I was referring more to the classic “in the 70s they said we were entering another ice age!” type of predictions. Or predicting how many polar bears will be left each year, etc. the common thread being statistics and predictions made to create headlines rather than relevance.
 
Justin Bailey said:
I was referring more to the classic “in the 70s they said we were entering another ice age!”
Click to expand...
That’s why people don’t believe the data at this point. It is laughable that they went from warming to cooling to warming to “Climate change”.
 
acceptance said:
What, do you think there has been a surge of “hay fever” since 2020?
Click to expand...
I don’t know, just my thinking on masks. I suppose it’s the same as assuming everyone with a mask is fearful of Covid.
 
acceptance said:
That’s why people don’t believe the data at this point. It is laughable that they went from warming to cooling to warming to “Climate change”.
Click to expand...

that’s my entire point though. People who “don’t believe the data” are not actually looking at the data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top