PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Off-Topic Hurricane Irma

Hmmmmm (as I said earlier "tiresome" becasue this is no longer a thread about checking on forum members and wishing them well, offering help and moral support. And it is definitely not "music" related.

Again ALL AFFECTED forum members: I WISH YOU WELL and God speed (oops did I bring in the deity?)

but as long as we are going there:

So let’s hear from some actual scientists (yes, there is one link below who is not a scientist but puts together a coherent counterpoint to one - as long as you actually listen to it). Being a "scientist" a troublesome mathematician, (no I don't play one on TV) who worked almost daily (for decades) with other mathematicians, physicists, statisticians, and "experimental'ists" - you know the kind of folks who are all from the “Missouri state of science” (aka "SHOW ME"). The kind of nose-to-the-grindstone professionals that would say something like:

"Give me your data (ALL THE DATA), method and other details of data collection (and how data verification was performed), data not included (and why, but give it to me anyway), models, model assumptions, equations, equation and model simplification(s) for things like 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ..nth order effects and nth order interactions. Considerations that had to be excluded or "assumed" because computationally unknown, unknowable, un-computable [even the best fluid dynamic models - have some assumed parameters, nth order partial differentials, and other aspects because there is no way to symbolize them, estimate their initial conditions, etc.]

How the models and equations were verified and validated plus the reports and studies SHOWING the verification and validation. How well did said models and equations work on interpolation of existing data, was there any re-sampling,...? even with perfect fits of data (and correlations of rho approaching 1/-1 doesn’t mean the equation or model can EXTRAPOLATE (i.e., predict) accurately, or even well, even one n-tuple point beyond the domain.

Plus a long list of OTHER pertinent FACTS - then finally tell me your testing hypotheses, statistical test methods and attributes (e.g., 1-beta: aka power of the statistical design, alpha, etc.), and finally the outcomes.

Now I will go out and re-exam this area myself, once I have my own understanding of it, then let's see if I, and OTHERS, can repeat your tests and analyses and after performing independent analyses get the same results. Maybe I'll do independent data collection, data verification, model verification, different types of numerical and statistical analyses and see IF I still get these results.

In actual (hard) science there is objective, constant, consistent, unchanging truth: there is no measurable criteria with the quality called: "consensus." Yes, a group of experts can (and we all of us almost always do) hold a consensus of opinion, or a consensus of the general effect of X on A - but it is never considered "proof" of X on A. Proof stands separate and apart and is repeatable and verifiable.

Even if consensus were an acceptable scientific principal asking the very group of "experts" whose funding, livelihood, and (peer) reputation depends mainly, if not SOLELY, on only one kind and direction for their studies and analyses that group is NOT the group to verify said studies and outcomes.

That's akin to

FBI: "Hey, mafia are you mugs still running numbers, bribing officials, corrupting unions...?"
Mafia: "Nah, the consensus of us mafioso members is we ain't never done nutin' like 'dat"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxHfb66ZgM&t=981s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs&t=231s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOGt3OzTXBs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrQxidb4xSQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzyARQZ5vkc

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/08/thanks-to-the-ipcc-the-public-doesnt-know-water-vapor-is-most-important-greenhouse-gas/

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/climatesciencenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html

and on and on and on.......


OUT HERE

Larry