[98ZJ USMC]

The scientists and journalists who agitate in favor of Global Warming "science" might be more believable if they could do basic arithmetic. Age 32 would be born in 1979/1980, which only by a stretch qualifies as "the early 1980s", but those age 52 would be born in 1959/1960, which does not qualify as "the mid-1960s". I remember when real scientists considered math a basic tool of the trade and would be embarrassed by such an absurd error - and would verbally beat down a faker who couldn't do math. ------------- ..and these are the tools that completely understand a ridiculously complex subject like Global Climate. Uh-huh.....

[Pollster1]

...and these are the tools that completely understand a ridiculously complex subject like Global Climate. Uh-huh.....

I have been to several conferences on AGW, mainly to get the scoop straight from the "experts", to see if I'm missing something (yep, that's the scientist in me, questioning my own knowledge and assumptions). They can't do the math and don't even understand what math it is that they can't do. These people inherently assume a linear model for a highly non-linear system, and they don't acknowledge that there is a fundamental problem with that assumption. As for their application of statistics, any professor who allowed a student to pass with the level of knowledge shown in the AGW community should be ashamed.

[Right Brother]

I caught that too. I was thinking ‘Wow, I’m 55. I didn’t know that I was so close to being a generation Xer’.