One of the stupidest arguments I've seen made here and elsewhere is that unless you are a certified "climate scientist," your thinking and opinions have no significance. This gag has been used to nullify many sources.
This is a Space Board. I have twenty years of experience working in space launch systems and manned spacecraft designs for NASA, DARPA, and private space companies.
How many who post on this board regularly have the "right" pedigree, by this silly thesis, to have an opinion on serious space issues?
What is "fergusbrown's" formal training? According to his bio, he seems to have a degree in Philosophy, and is a wind power salesman. By your strict qualification requirements, where does he get off pontificating on scientific climate issues?
Flame » in reply to nice quote from the endicrinologist you have there
Is being an endocrinologist significant in itself?
The whole thread (48 posts)
- No to AGW thread moved to flame, sorry (n/t)
- On modelling...
- Why?
- Completely unjustified.... (n/t)
- Maybe if you learn to debate in a more civil tone. (n/t)
- LOL
- There was and is no 'debate'.
- Thank you for sharing your dogma.
- re: There was and is no 'debate'.
- Anyone that takes 'S' seriously should do a little research on his 'source'...The very fact that this is the best you can come up with proves my point....
- A July 2007 review of 539 abstracts
- nice quote from the endicrinologist you have there
- Maybe if you learn to debate in a more civil tone. (n/t)