How do we Know Human are Causing Climate Change?

[jc456]

I never said it was free. Everything costs if you're going to be realistic. Only fools believe in something for nothing.

So it isn’t cheaper right?

 

[jc456]

It doesn't really matter when I say 5% of the population. Regardless of how many are in the population, 5% represents a very small fraction of the entire population

How do you actually know the percentage if you don’t have the actual count? That’s not very scientific

 

[Paracetamol63]

How is that possible if earth is warming?

Because climate change means that globally the average temperature increases but locally the climate changes and it can change to a cooler climate.

It is actually EXPECTED that with global warming some places may actually get COOLER!

Here's just one example: How Global Warming Can Chill the Planet

 

[Paracetamol63]

How do you actually know the percentage if you don’t have the actual count? That’s not very scientific

May I ask, mathematically, how my point would change if there were 9,987 climate scientists or 45 climate scientists?

5% is still a minority fraction of the total.

My point still stands.

 

[jc456]

I looked it up you idiot. I don't remember the total number but 14,000 of them declared it as a climate emergency.

Really? Where’s the list?

 

[jc456]

May I ask, mathematically, how my point would change if there were 9,987 climate scientists or 45 climate scientists?

5% is still a minority fraction of the total.

My point still stands.

Because you don’t have that that’s why

 

[Paracetamol63]

Because you don’t have that that’s why

It kind of feels like you don't actually understand what a "percentage" is.

Apologies.

 

[jc456]

It kind of feels like you don't actually understand what a "percentage" is.

Apologies.

It seems you don’t. A percentage is from a total count of anything. So I want to know the quantity of scientists that percentage is from. That’s math

 

[Paracetamol63]

It seems you don’t. A percentage is from a total count of anything. So I want to know the quantity of scientists that percentage is from. That’s math

It is extremely common in science to characterize something based on a percentage even when you don't know the full population number.

This is a topic called a "sample". Scientists take a measurement from a SAMPLE of the whole population. Sometimes they don't even know what the whole population is. They are characterizing a SAMPLE.

Within that sample they can estimate what the WHOLE POPULATION is. This is, essentially, one of the main points of statistics.

Population and Sample Statistic - GeeksforGeeks

A Computer Science portal for geeks. It contains well written, well thought and well explained computer science and programming articles, quizzes and practice/competitive programming/company interview Questions.

www.geeksforgeeks.org

With more and more sampling the results give you better and better views of the whole population, but by no means is it necessary to measure the whole population. Many times you simply can't do that at all.

As such it is not necessary to know exactly how many climate scientists there are in the world. If we take samples and find (repeatedly) that the number comes out to about 5% of that population is skeptical we know pretty much all we DO need to know.

That's one of the main ways science is done.

 

[jc456]

It is extremely common in science to characterize something based on a percentage even when you don't know the full population number.

it is? first I ever heard of it. Everything I do in my job uses totals. Are you suggesting totals aren't important to use for calculations regarding human life? There are approximately 7 billion people on earth, you say 5% there's a fking number one can pull from the total, 350 million. subtract 350 million from 7 billion gives the other 95%. It's called statistics. You are using percentages as a statistic and as such demands approximate numbers. You think me the fool little one.

 

[jc456]

This is a topic called a "sample". Scientists take a measurement from a SAMPLE of the whole population. Sometimes they don't even know what the whole population is. They are characterizing a SAMPLE.

sample? hahahahahahahahahahhahahaha, sample from where? How do you get a sample without a whole number? The sample size for your 97% scientists was 97 out of 99, but there are like hundreds of thousands of scientists. Fitting a conclusion without the entire sample is unscientific. Just as there is no such thing as consensus in science. It is only if one wishes to con a society does one say such stupidity.

 

[Paracetamol63]

sample? hahahahahahahahahahhahahaha, sample from where? How do you get a sample without a whole number? The sample size for your 97% scientists was 97 out of 99, but there are like hundreds of thousands of scientists. Fitting a conclusion without the entire sample is unscientific. Just as there is no such thing as consensus in science. It is only if one wishes to con a society does one say such stupidity.

Believe it or not, when one studies things in nature they do EXACTLY that.

Do you think that population studies on wolves means they know exactly how many wolves are in the world? You must surely realize that is an impossible number to know.

 

[jc456]

Believe it or not, when one studies things in nature they do EXACTLY that.

Do you think that population studies on wolves means they know exactly how many wolves are in the world? You must surely realize that is an impossible number to know.

ONe thing I am very confident of, there isn't one scientist that knows why the earth climate behaves as it does. Not one. And that makes you the fool.

 

[Paracetamol63]

it is? first I ever heard of it. Everything I do in my job uses totals. Are you suggesting totals aren't important to use for calculations regarding human life? There are approximately 7 billion people on earth, you say 5% there's a fking number one can pull from the total, 35 million. subtract 35 million from 7 billion gives the other 95%. It's called statistics. You are using percentages as a statistic and as such demands approximate numbers. You think me the fool little one.

But what if I say the rate of "red hair" in the European population is about 3% do you think that someone actually goes out and counts every person in Europe? No, they take a SAMPLE and estimate the Population.

 

[jc456]

But what if I say the rate of "red hair" in the European population is about 3% do you think that someone actually goes out and counts every person in Europe? No, they take a SAMPLE and estimate the Population.

well first off, just saying a percentage gives you nothing of depth of the percentage. I could say 30% of demofks have lost their brains. Does it make it so? It's my opinion, something without fact. If someone says 3% of population is red hair, they'd have a number they picked that 3% from. 3% could be 3 out 100. Now you're working your way to polling nonsense. that 1000 people determine the minds of 1 million. nope, it's why polling is a farce.

 

[MisterBeale]

making crazy connections between public health measures and climate change.

Actually? The two hoaxes couldn't be closer linked if it were advertised and broadcast on your TEE VEE. Yoar ignorance of the facts, is no excuse for not knowing the truth.

They are both based on faulty modeling coming out of the Imperial College London.

What COVID forecasters can learn from climate models

Methods that are routine in computation-heavy fields could lead to more reliable pandemic predictions.

www.nature.com

How Bill Gates Funded Science Fraud in the Imperial College Covid Forecast Model - Brightwork Research & Analysis

The covid forecast model that was used as a rationale to justify lockdowns has been exposed as science fraud.This model was funded by Bill Gates to be deliberately exaggerated.

www.brightworkresearch.com

 

[Paracetamol63]

well first off, just saying a percentage gives you nothing of depth of the percentage. I could say 30% of demofks have lost their brains. Does it make it so? It's my opinion, something without fact. If someone says 3% of population is red hair, they'd have a number they picked that 3% from. 3% could be 3 out 100.

Unfortunately it is clear we are talking past each other.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The estimated climate change damage to the United States alone last year was $145 billion dollars.

You could fertilize a corn field with that number.
Hope they washed their hands after they pulled that out.

There were 20 separate events that were over a billion dollars each.

How much would they have cost if we spent $100 billion more on windmills?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

99% of our scientists firmly believe in the catastrophic event called climate change that is gripping our planet. The other 1% probably work for big oil or big coal or just Fringe lunatics.

99% believe it's catastrophic? Link?

 

[jc456]

Unfortunately it is clear we are talking past each other.

it is clear you are flinging pooh on a wall and think I'm gonna accept your pooh. Nope. Again, if you choose to use percentages then I want the counts that is derived from.