Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[Anaxogoras]

Cap1, what moray is describing is indeed a professional standard.  442w30 is a statistician, and he taught me a similar technique when using zscores to evaluate the AH aircraft.  When looking at a distribution of points, the 'outliers' are indeed throw-aways.

Here is the thread where I showed my results: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,264759.0.html  In this case, anything with a score in a category, like air-speed, over 2 or under -2 would be a statistical outlier.

[MORAY37]

I don't buy that at all... 8.25% of the population are scientists? Ahhh.... No.


My regards,

Widewing

Table 3-6
S&E degree holders with R&D work activities, by occupation: 2006
Employed S&E
degree holders
R&D as major
work activity
R&D at least
10% of work time
Occupation Number Percent Number Percent
R&D activity
rate (%) Number Percent
R&D activity
rate (%)
All occupations ............................. ... 13,752,000 100.0 4,155,000 100.0 30.2 7,369,000 100.0 53.6
S&E occupations ......................... 4,295,000 31.2 2,541,000 61.2 59.2 3,371,000 45.7 78.5
Computer/mathematical
scientists................... ............. 1,626,000 11.8 802,000 19.3 49.3 1,171,000 15.9 72.0
Life scientists ........................... 435,000 3.2 330,000 7.9 75.7 383,000 5.2 88.0
Physical scientists ................... 319,000 2.3 220,000 5.3 68.9 264,000 3.6 82.8
Social scientists ...................... 412,000 3.0 197,000 4.7 47.7 271,000 3.7 65.6
Engineers.................... ............. 1,502,000 10.9 993,000 23.9 66.1 1,282,000 17.4 85.4
S&E-related occupations............. 2,236,000 16.3 524,000 12.6 23.4 1,110,000 15.1 49.6
Non-S&E occupations ................. 7,221,000 52.5 1,090,000 26.2 15.1 2,888,000 39.2 40.0

Highlighted fields= 2.79 million

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics

From 2006.... so these figures are even low, as of this date.  Also, current U.S. population according to Census Bureau is 308,562,364.  2,790,000/ 308,562,634=.00904x100=0.9%
Aren't engineers supposed to be good with numbers?

 Maybe try "search" feature located in your browser before you throw the attitude in your post.  

[CAP1]

CAP1,
While I regularly judge people by those they associate with, that's a pretty wide swath of people & a large movement to judge by the actions of a few.

That would be like saying that, since Ted Haggard turned out to buy methamphetamine and sex from a male prostitute, all people who are openly against gay marriage are only doing so to cover up and justify their own insecurities.

Or, that all Aces High players believe that flying at 37,000' is a good way of saving fuel

we all judge people that way. it doesn't matter who ya are, ya do it.

once again though, i never said ALL scientists........i was referencing the climate scientists. and those that know about the ""massaging"" of the numbers that was done, and by whom.
 the ones that did it are out and out liars. those that know about what the liars did, and did nothing, are no better.

 another example.......i recently kicked out a customer. he was a used car dealer. he was bringing me about 10 cars a month.
 the problem was that they were crap. he was outright bull souping customers about these cars, and telling them i was his mechanic.
 this was starting to give me a bad rep in the area.......now, i could've gone along with his crap, and kept those 10 cars a month comin, and continued making that money on them.....or i could've done the right thing....and dis-associate myself from this guy.
 there is no reason whatsoever that scientists cannot do the same with the "shady" ones.

 again, i don't say ALL scientists. i wouldn't hold anything against a scientist at dupont just because of this.

 i don't hold anythign against all engineers, even though i truly believe automotive engineers sole purpose in life is to help me injure myself on their cars.

[MORAY37]

we all judge people that way. it doesn't matter who ya are, ya do it.



 another example.......i recently kicked out a customer. he was a used car dealer. he was bringing me about 10 cars a month.
 the problem was that they were crap. he was outright bull souping customers about these cars, and telling them i was his mechanic.
 this was starting to give me a bad rep in the area.......now, i could've gone along with his crap, and kept those 10 cars a month comin, and continued making that money on them.....or i could've done the right thing....and dis-associate myself from this guy.
 there is no reason whatsoever that scientists cannot do the same with the "shady" ones.

My question, and not my judgment upon you CAP...

He was bringing you 10 crappy cars a month he was selling ...  A
He was bringing you 10 crappy cars a month he was selling and using your name behind them.... B

Which of these things did you fire him for again, A or B?

This is exactly why you can't judge a whole community by the actions of a few.  It isn't until the actions of some negatively affect others, that "people get outed".  You didn't fire this sleaze until he was giving your business a bad name.

[Motherland]

we all judge people that way. it doesn't matter who ya are, ya do it.

I always get a kick out of people who say that they don't

[CAP1]

My question, and not my judgment upon you CAP...

He was bringing you 10 crappy cars a month he was selling ...  A
He was bringing you 10 crappy cars a month he was selling and using your name behind them.... B

Which of these things did you fire him for again, A or B?

This is exactly why you can't judge a whole community by the actions of a few.  It isn't until the actions of some negatively affect others, that "people get outed".  You didn't fire this sleaze until he was giving your business a bad name.

he was bringing me the cars, to fix only what was necessary to sell them.

then he was implying that i was his mechanic...as in i was in his employ, and did all of the regular maintenance on these cars, whereas in reality, i was pretty much bandaging them, by doing only what he needed to sell em.

 we in the automotive repair business already have a bad name in general....because we're judged. the fact that i'm judged doesn't bother me. but i can, and will  do all in my power to change peoples perception of me at my shop.
 
 i'm not your typical auto tech. i make sure that every one of my customers knows exactly what they're paying for, and why they need it.


 as for your edit....i REALLY needed the money to be coming into the shop. it almost put me out of business to kick his bellybutton out. he talked to friends, and i lost some business besides his when i did that. at the point when i did this, i was only there for 6 months......and the bad rep was happening that fast. it's been about a year and a couple months now, and finally gettin better.

 it's comin back around though....business is picking back up, and people are coming to me because they were sent by friends, or coworkers. they all say the same things. that i'm honest, and it's nearly impossible to find an honest mechanic.
 sad part is i agree with them....it IS nearly impossible.
 but i am....and because of this, i can sleep sound at night.

[MORAY37]

he was bringing me the cars, to fix only what was necessary to sell them.

then he was implying that i was his mechanic...as in i was in his employ, and did all of the regular maintenance on these cars, whereas in reality, i was pretty much bandaging them, by doing only what he needed to sell em.

 we in the automotive repair business already have a bad name in general....because we're judged. the fact that i'm judged doesn't bother me. but i can, and will  do all in my power to change peoples perception of me at my shop.
 
 i'm not your typical auto tech. i make sure that every one of my customers knows exactly what they're paying for, and why they need it.


 as for your edit....i REALLY needed the money to be coming into the shop. it almost put me out of business to kick his bellybutton out. he talked to friends, and i lost some business besides his when i did that. at the point when i did this, i was only there for 6 months......and the bad rep was happening that fast. it's been about a year and a couple months now, and finally gettin better.

 it's comin back around though....business is picking back up, and people are coming to me because they were sent by friends, or coworkers. they all say the same things. that i'm honest, and it's nearly impossible to find an honest mechanic.
 sad part is i agree with them....it IS nearly impossible.
 but i am....and because of this, i can sleep sound at night.

Like I said, it wasn't a judgment.  It was a realistic comparison.  

Had he not blathered about you being "his" mechanic, you likely would have continued bandaging them, because you were enjoying the steady business.  The function of one choice does not extrapolate to the other...that being you didn't agree with his business dealings.

The two were separate until your business was affected.

[CAP1]

Like I said, it wasn't a judgment.  It was a realistic comparison.  

Had he not blathered about you being "his" mechanic, you likely would have continued bandaging them, because you were enjoying the steady business.  The function of one choice does not extrapolate to the other...that being you didn't agree with his business dealings.

The two were separate until your business was affected.

and this is the sort of thing happening now, with global warming. those that've been being underhanded, would be the car dealer..........those that know about it and are still among the car dealers.......well......you know where i'm goin.

 and it actually hurt my business more for awhile for me to kick him out. had i kept my mouth shut, and kept working on his cars, i'd have a LOT more money in the bank right now.

  i understand that ya weren't judging me too.........i can judge(pun intended again) your posts well enough to realize that. you've remained respectful throughout this entire thread.  

EDIT::

i should also add.......the dude started off bringing me nicer stuff to work on.

such as this.

i traded him the 85 5th ave that i bought from him, when i bought this from him. it needed nothing....till i beat on it a little too much. 

[Widewing]

I think you're off by a decimal place.

2,600,000/308,562,007 * 100 = 00.8%

Granted, 2.6 million sounds like a lot, but sometimes terms like 'scientist' cast a very wide net.

You're right, I misplaced the decimal point. Should have been .825%   Long day... Wasn't paying attention to detail.

Yes, it is a very wide net... Moray used that to exaggerate his point by using a very loose general classification to imply actual research scientists.

The National Board of Science classifies based upon receiving a Bachelor of Science degree in many different disciplines, most unrelated to actual scientific study. The vast majority do meet the classic description of a scientist. Probably something less than 10% of the 2.6 million cited.


My regards,

Widewing

[mtnman]

I'm still not buying that man is responsible for GW.  I'm open to learning more though, and find this discussion to be quite interesting.

But man, what a laugh about the planes sinking through the ice!

It reminds me of the scientific discussion I saw in a movie, on how to tell if someone is a witch.  This thread was ready for some humor!

[EskimoJoe]

It reminds me of the scientific discussion I saw in a movie, on how to tell if someone is a witch.  This thread was ready for some humor!

The Holy Grail, perhaps? 

[MORAY37]

You're right, I misplaced the decimal point. Should have been .825%   Long day... Wasn't paying attention to detail.

Yes, it is a very wide net... Moray used that to exaggerate his point by using a very loose general classification to imply actual research scientists.

The National Board of Science classifies based upon receiving a Bachelor of Science degree in many different disciplines, most unrelated to actual scientific study. The vast majority do meet the classic description of a scientist. Probably something less than 10% of the 2.6 million cited.


My regards,

Widewing

My figures were generated using the NSF published figures, along with the caveat that at least 10% of their work time was involved in R and D.  That isn't a wide web sir.  It is very specific.  You can easily find it under the "employment" section of the site I hyperlinked.  These are working individuals, not "degree awarded waiting to find a job".

What is the "classic" description of a scientist?  

And, please reference something that says "10% of that figure" without just throwing out a personal opinion. You're saying 260,000 scientists in the country?  Back it up.  It seems, as of late, you have become more prone to fettering out your own opinion, rather than to approach any question with any amount of research.

There are more "Life Scientists" (Biologists) alone, in this country. "Life scientists ........................... 435,000 "  (Spending a minimum of 10% of paid time researching, not administrating. This amounts to full time, because unfortunately, at least 80% of researchers' time goes towards administrative duties.)

2.8 million scientists work in this country sir. This figure also does not include Federal positions, which have their own classification system.

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/

[Widewing]

My figures were generated using the NSF published figures, along with the caveat that at least 10% of their work time was involved in R and D.  That isn't a wide web sir.  It is very specific.  You can easily find it under the "employment" section of the site I hyperlinked.  These are working individuals, not "degree awarded waiting to find a job".

What is the "classic" description of a scientist?  

And, please reference something that says "10% of that figure" without just throwing out a personal opinion. You're saying 260,000 scientists in the country?  Back it up.  It seems, as of late, you have become more prone to fettering out your own opinion, rather than to approach any question with any amount of research.

There are more "Life Scientists" (Biologists) alone, in this country. "Life scientists ........................... 435,000 "  (Spending a minimum of 10% of paid time researching, not administrating. This amounts to full time, because unfortunately, at least 80% of researchers' time goes towards administrative duties.)

2.8 million scientists work in this country sir. This figure also does not include Federal positions, which have their own classification system.

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/

Again, you are using a general classification that includes middle school math teachers and geeks programming Visual Basic in your 2.8 million "scientists".

Lets see... There are 1,454,515 active duty personnel in the US Military. Add another 843,000 reserve and guard. That's 2,297,515 people Let's add the 683,396 police officers in the USA to that. We now have 2,890,911 people in total. So, according to your distortion of the NSF figures, there are nearly as many scientists as there are military and police? LOLOLOL

Everyone knows several military personnel, and everyone knows a few cops. How many know that many scientists? Show of hands?

Why should I waste any time whatsoever debating you when you're using red herring arguments? BS degree with a minor in BS....


My regards,

Widewing

[CAP1]

interesting little tidbit from another forum.

if this crap is true.....well......ykou know what i'm gonna say next.'


and moray.......just an FYI, which i think you already know.........you have kept perfectly civil, and polite throughout this thread....and that is part of why i htink it's still open.

 thanks for that. this is one of the more interesting threads, and it would suck for it to get locked.

http://dctrawler.dailycaller.com/2010/01/26/copenhagen-didnt-accomplish-anything-but-at-least-it-was-hideously-expensive/

[MORAY37]

Lets see... There are 1,454,515 active duty personnel in the US Military. Add another 843,000 reserve and guard. That's 2,297,515 people Let's add the 683,396 police officers in the USA to that. We now have 2,890,911 people in total. So, according to your distortion of the NSF figures, there are nearly as many scientists as there are military and police? LOLOLOL



My regards,

Widewing

Prove otherwise.  Unless their is a secret ratio of active duty military/police officers: scientists that I don't know about.  There are currently 6.2 million teachers in the United States.... does that have anything at all to do with the number of scientists either??

Your argument posts no relevance to the premise you make, and has no logic behind it.