Peer reviewed by you guys? Lmao!! Talk about a joke. You guys define stupid. Look at Willie's argument against global warming. That some scientists predicted that Lake Michigan would continue losing water after it had lost 4-5 feet over a decade and then it gained water one year. So I guess that means global warming isn't real. That's how stupid you guys sound. Then Willie talking about this being a natural weather pattern because that's what weather does. This passes as scientific thought to you guys??
It's beyond embarrassing. You guys are really dumb.
Right on cue.
scum actually thinks he's smart, despite the fact that he's batting .000 at a debate site and gets banned from multiple forums for being the scum that he is
lets just say intelligent people don't get themselves banned, that's pretty fucking weird
This explains you guys to a T!!! I think the most important phrase there is "the limited human capacity to process information". Basically you guys have child like minds when having to process complex information, which is why you think posting an article about the Great Lakes rising 1 year supports your claim, or you take the words of one individual who agrees with you as Gospel and ignore thousands of others. It is absolutely hilarious. Like dealing with children.
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[SUP][Note 1][/SUP][SUP][1][/SUP] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).
A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.
Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in political and organizational contexts.
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[SUP][Note 1][/SUP][SUP][1][/SUP] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).
A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.
Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in political and organizational contexts.
Antarctic sea ice hits second all-time record in a week
Posted on July 2, 2014 by stevengoddard
stevengoddard:
Originally posted on Talking About the Weather:
A graph of the latest all-time record of Southern Hemisphere sea ice area, expressed as an anomaly, courtesy of The Cryosphere Today.
Antarctic sea ice has hit its second all-time record maximum this week. The new record is 2.112 million square kilometers above normal. Until the weekend just past, the previous record had been 1.840 million square kilometers above normal, a mark hit on December 20, 2007, as I reported here, and also covered in my book.
Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, responded to e-mail questions and also spoke by telephone about the new record sea ice growth in the Southern Hemisphere, indicating that, somewhat counter-intuitively, the sea ice growth was specifically due to global warming.
Serreze
“The primary reason for this is the nature of the circulation of the Southern Ocean – water heated in high southern latitudes is carried equatorward, to be replaced…
Comment: Global warming is counter-intuitive. So were humans responsible for this.
Posted on July 2, 2014 by stevengoddard
Mark Serreze demonstrates a classic example of making up technical sounding gibberish to confuse laymen.
A graph of the latest all-time record of Southern Hemisphere sea ice area, expressed as an anomaly, courtesy of The Cryosphere Today.Antarctic sea ice has hit its second all-time record maximum this week. The new record is 2.112 million square kilometers above normal. Until the weekend just past, the previous record had been 1.840 million square kilometers above normal, a mark hit on December 20, 2007, as I reported here, and also covered in my book.
Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, responded to e-mail questions and also spoke by telephone about the new record sea ice growth in the Southern Hemisphere, indicating that, somewhat counter-intuitively, the sea ice growth was specifically due to global warming.
Serreze“The primary reason for this is the nature of the circulation of the Southern Ocean – water heated in high southern latitudes is carried equatorward, to be replaced…
Comment: Global warming is counter-intuitive. So were humans responsible for this.
Oh yeah, let's go all "peer review!!"
[h=1]Stem Cell Research Papers Are Retracted[/h]
Two scientific papers that initially electrified biologists by describing an easy way to make stem cells were retracted on Wednesday by the journal that published them after they were found to be riddled with “critical errors.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/03/business/stem-cell-research-papers-are-retracted.html?_r=0
[h=1]Stem Cell Research Papers Are Retracted[/h]
Two scientific papers that initially electrified biologists by describing an easy way to make stem cells were retracted on Wednesday by the journal that published them after they were found to be riddled with “critical errors.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/03/business/stem-cell-research-papers-are-retracted.html?_r=0
