Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

More experts on the way!

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by fekkinell, Nov 1, 2009.

  1. Finally! Somebody is speaking some sense in the media!



  2. In the which case you probably won't want to read the opinion of 31,478 experts who also reckon that global warming is a load of fetid dingo's kidneys :LOL:

  3. I can't help but feel that people that really enjoyed this piece would come out of it with an over-inflated sense of their own abilities to make common sense decisions about things that perhaps really should be left to the experts.
  4. Nutrition bugs me. The amount of nonsense Ive been told by experts is astounding.
  5. Paul, as you believe that dinosaurs and humans coexisted, you should really stay away from anything to do with science.

    Regarding the 31000 signatures on the Oregon Petition.

  6. Paul, as you believe that dinosaurs and humans coexisted, you should really stay away from anything to do with science.

    actually, no. I have as much right to discuss this subject as any other, while you have no right to suggest that I do not.
  7. The right, yes. The knowledge/competence, no.
  8. in your opinion, which i can disregard
  9. Uh Oh! Here we go!

    Paul, I think that the World is pretty much agreed that climate change is upon us. The only point of contention is the reason, whether humans have made it worse and what, if anything, can be done to affect that change (and, if indeed it is needed).
  10. This article has some amusing elements in it, but fails to be accurate because of the manner in which it has dismissed what is simple, obvious, and very well documented “Statistical Data” (In relation to the climate debate)
    In this I am referring to “Data” not a feeling or a belief or a gut response. But the actual recording of relevant values and the cross referencing of them to develop what has shown to be a valid and supportable hypothesis.
    Unfortunately (And I say unfortunately because life would be so much simpler if these numbers were wrong) The counter argument has not been based on the same amount of thorough data (As is shown every time this debate comes up on these boards). And as such until some more credible research is put forward to attempt to show a counter argument, any assertion that Human induced climate change is not a fact is quite baseless.
  11. Oh dear. I seem to have opened it again. :facepalm:


    I just like that there was finally an article about 'experts'. It seems to me the term is bandied about far too much for it to mean much anymore.

    I mean, there was an article the other day quoting an 'expert' about what to wear to the horse races. Seriously. ](*,)
  12. We're getting some quality arguments on here lately, very amusing please keep it up.
  13. =D>=D>=D>

    Data is out there, just a little harder to find than 'expert opinion'

    I like the Australian Bureau of Statistics; many countries don't have such an entity.

  14. Aww c'mon... at least say 'over' sheesh. :p

  16. Paul you made a point, used a link, which failed the test. Frickin man up about it rather than obfuscate and having a sook. For goodness sake.
  17. ... which is pretty much the point of the article. It's the laziness of the general population when it comes to finding and analysing the facts of any given issue (climate change being a perfect example) that has led to the rise of the 'expert' who apparently has done the work and will tell us what we should think.
  18. #18 Ljiljan, Nov 2, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2015
  19. HAHAHAHAHA stupid people believing the wrong stupid scientists who are so stpidly stupid!

    ... Yet many people who claim they are atheists or agnostics, say they will only accept proof of a spiritual being when it can be proved physically.
    Are you one of those people. DG?

    Would you only accept proof of a god when a physicist says they've got some evidence?

    Science is funded by grants.
    IE successful people who sell lots of products and make lots of money, invest in the scientific development of things that interest or benefit them.

    With "oh noes! Climate Changezzzz!" being a foregone conclusion, it is a career-killer to claim otherwise.

    I've heard there were scientists during the Industrial Revolution who used to eat lead as a demonstration to assuage health-fears about it's use in fuel, paint and even food tins.
  20. So look at the associated data, much of it has been displayed in these very boards time and time again.
    Don’t just rely on the findings but look at the data for yourself.