Professor Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School of Business at the Univ. of Pennsyvania, also associated with the Heartland Institute, is internationally known for his pioneering work on forecasting methods. Recently, he challenged former Vice-President Al Gore regarding Global Climate Modeling - and today sent off another letter:
March 28, 2008
Honorable Albert Gore
2100 West End Avenue,
Suite 620
Nashville, TN 37203
Fax 615 327-1323
Dear Mr. Gore,
The extended deadline for the Global Warming Challenge has passed and, despite the fact that I have responded to all of your concerns to date regarding the challenge, you have not been willing to engage in a scientific test of your forecasts of dangerous global warming.
Despite our literature searches and our appeals both on the Internet and in our published paper on climate change, my colleague and I have been unable to find a single scientific forecast to support global warming. If you are aware of such a study, I appeal to you directly to reveal it to the scientific community so that it can be subject to peer review and so the public can see the scientific basis for your claims.
In addition we need to continue scientific studies. Thus, I pose this question:
“When and under what conditions would you be willing to engage in a scientific test of your global warming forecasts?”
I look forward to your responses. By your own words, the global warming issue remains an important one for the future of the world. Given the enormous expenditures on this issue, I hope that as a concerned and influential citizen, you will take an active role in encouraging the application of science to this issue.
Sincerely,
J. Scott Armstrong
---------------
A history of the Global Warning Challenge is provided at http://theclimatebet.com. It includes all correspondence between Scott Armstrong and Al Gore. The site will post all papers that purport to provide scientific forecasts of global warming. The papers must provide full disclosure on how the forecasts were made, as full disclosure is one of the basic principles of science.
There are no logical flaws you idiot. I was retaliating against what he said. Which I wouldn't have to do if dummies like you weren't giving these leftist clowns a pass the whole time.
Now lets see some evidence or admit that the alarmists are wrong and the climate-rationalists are right.
GMB, I'm not siding with Gavin. However, can you see a major flaw in your argument?
"Gavin. You look like a gentleman who hasn't been getting it in a very long time. You appear to be some sad loser who is probably 50 and still a virgin.
And you can say all this but why is it that you cannot come up with evidence to justify your manifest treason?"
Treat it like a logic exercise. Pretend you didn't say it, but just look at what is written and see if you can locate any logical flaws...
"Been thinking the sceptics net is essentially a blokes thingy, lots of huffin n puffin and bugger all substance. Hunting round the internet for fresh victims has become a pack event however I reckon sex is simply off their menu back home.
Besides where are the ladies? The ones with real power of denial in whatever are absent in droves.
Posted by: gavin at March 30, 2008 09:05 PM"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
RRRRIIIIIGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTT
Gavin. You look like a gentleman who hasn't been getting it in a very long time. You appear to be some sad loser who is probably 50 and still a virgin.
And you can say all this but why is it that you cannot come up with evidence to justify your manifest treason?
I myself am married, but you are a drone for sure.
It's like challenging the newsreader to a debate. Totally pointless, but a good stunt.
Well Luke there is only one of you, why dont you stand for parliament and do better?
You keep crapping on about fascists, time to put up or shut up.
Whew! Just woke up and having my morning coffee. My head is spinning! What were we talking about again? Yuck, it's -10C again, this morning! Usually the crocus are pushing up by the end of February, but there's still a foot of snow on the flower beds, ditto on the vegetable garden, so stop bragging about the warm weather you guys get down under, you're makin' me feel bad.
BTW, Luke, thanks for standing up for me, buddy, I really didn't realize my prose was so dense and difficult to understand. Actually, I'm not on GMB's side either. I stand alone as a unique individual who seeks only knowledge and genteel discussion. May the Force be with you!
Cheers......theoldhogger
gavin: lots of huffin n puffin and bugger all substance.
I'd be wary of the stones I throw if I were you; living in a greenhouse as you do you might accidently break something and let out all that hot air.
"This is not a blog for science and reason" Ain't that the truth hey
Been thinking the sceptics net is essentially a blokes thingy, lots of huffin n puffin and bugger all substance. Hunting round the internet for fresh victims has become a pack event however I reckon sex is simply off their menu back home.
Besides where are the ladies? The ones with real power of denial in whatever are absent in droves.
Randy - not here you don't mate. This is not a blog for science and reason.
That might change if you leave Luke.
Randy - not here you don't mate. This is not a blog for science and reason.