--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > <shempmcgurk@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Of course, new.morning's questions are based on a > > > misunderstanding of how the survey was conducted, > > > > Since you are a stickler for correctness, I did not misunderstand > > how the survey was conducted. > > LOL! Sure you did. You assumed the 100 scientists they > attempted to contact were a (hopefully random) sample > of all the climate scientists in the "US/world," first > of all, rather than somebody's list of the 100 *top* > climate scientists in the U.S.
Your lack of precision surprises me. I said "how the survey was conducted". Apparently you are not aware of the distinction of conducting a survey, operative word "conducting", and the preceeding steps -- sample design, etc. Anyway, I was simply offering you some feedback on a subtle point of imprecision. If you don't care to understand it, Ok. Its not a point of argument. > > <snip> > > >But I'm sure that's exactly the > > > kinds of questions those reflexively opposed to the > > > consensus view on global warming would attempt to > > > raise, in order to confuse the issue as much as > > > possible. > > > > And as my example testifies, that's ALSO exactly the kinds of > > questions asked by those who support the consensus view on global > > warming, and have since working on the issue professional in 1990- > > 92. > > But not about *this* survey. ??? > > And I raised such, without partisian intent, but to gain understand. > > Of course. Those I was referring to, unlike you, would > be misrepresenting the relevant questions deliberately. Ok. Just clarifying my response was not knee-jerk reflexive. Not that it matters. Just pointing out, in a well-intentioned feedback sort of way, "Those reflexively opposed to the ..." was not clear if you were including me in that group -- having just referenced me in your post. Ne way, its just feedback, not argumentation. Take it or leave it as suits you. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/XISQkA/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
