Thread: The Australian newspaper article - Global Cooling!?

A week off,just to update his Wiki Waki mmgw propaganda machine?

Delusion is endemic in the mmgw fanatics these days.

I THINK SOME OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY STARTING TO BELIEVE THEIR OWN mmgw DRIVEL.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

From post #91 in the other thread (Waiting for global cooling) this verbatim what you posted:

"Qualification to be a signatory requires that the individual have a university degree in physical science, either BS, MS, or PhD. Those with PhD degrees are so designated. Those with BS and MS degrees are undesignated or sometimes designated as MD if appropriate."

That makes no mention of "changing" anyones qualifications but rather listing the MDs as such without their underlying degrees. The reason? Most likely so you can easily see how many MDs are on the list and thus it cannot be claimed that all the non listed names are MDs. The non-listed names all have BS or MS degrees. This is not complicated.

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee

And is not even true, he had bloody economists and such.

And this is from the guy who seems to think the official endorsement of major science societies like the Royal society only means the proof their presidents support MMGW. He is a Don't feed him!

Yes I CLEARLY had economists listed under SOCIAL SCIENTISTS! Which they are. It is also irrelevant to the fact that I CLEARLY had hundreds of Natural Scientists and Meteorologists and this petition is COMPLETELY signed by those who possess physical science degrees.

A president of a society signing a paper in no way decides the consensus of opinion of it's members. Does the Prime Minister signing a paper mean the consensus of Parliament or the Electorate? Does the President of the US signing a piece of paper mean it is the consensus of the US Congress or the US electorate? Presidents of Science Societies are political positions within the organization that are elected. The whole society is a big fraternity where they only let in who they want made up of only 1400 members.

Originally Posted by Poptech

That makes no mention of "changing" anyones qualifications but rather listing the MDs as such without their underlying degrees. The reason? Most likely so you can easily see how many MDs are on the list and thus it cannot be claimed that all the non listed names are MDs. The non-listed names all have BS or MS degrees. This is not complicated.

Which part of this you don't you get.
"Those with BS and MS .......sometimes designated as MD"

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Which part of this you don't you get.
"Those with BS and MS .......sometimes designated as MD"

You have SERIOUS reading comprehension skills:

"Those with BS and MS degrees are undesignated or sometimes designated as MD if appropriate."

All the signers have a physical science degree (BS, MS, PhD) Anyone without a PhD are just listed with their name except for MDs. They are not sometimes listing MDs, they are explaining that just because they list the MDs does not mean they do not have a BS or MS degree. I already explained why they would want to list MDs - so no one could say all the undesignated names are medical doctors and make some irrelevant argument about it.

Originally Posted by Poptech

You have SERIOUS reading comprehension skills:

"Those with BS and MS degrees are undesignated or sometimes designated as MD if appropriate."

Why?????
Why sometimes designate an MS degree as MD?

Originally Posted by Poptech

All the signers have a physical science degree (BS, MS, PhD)

That's what the OISM claims.
A requirement.
Yet not one physical science degree is given. Not one.
Why?????

Originally Posted by Besoeker

[/B]
Why?????
Why sometimes designate an MS degree as MD?

Because they wanted to list all the MDs and some of them have MS degrees too.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

That's what the OISM claims.
A requirement.
Yet not one physical science degree is given. Not one.
Why?????

SPACE

Originally Posted by Poptech

Because they wanted to list all the MDs and some of them have MS degrees too.

That, in no way, answers the question:
"Why sometimes designate an MS degree as MD?"
I'm sure even you see that.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

That, in no way, answers the question:
"Why sometimes designate an MS degree as MD?"
I'm sure even you see that.

It does for people with brains something you have appeared to have long lost. They do not list any BS or MS designations but they do list ALL MD and PhDs. Since all the MDs have either a BS or MS degree then some of the MS degrees would be listed as MD but it clearly states:

Those with BS and MS degrees are undesignated or sometimes designated as MD if appropriate.

Again no person that has a BS or MS degree was designated but all MDs were designated thus some BS and MS degree holders would be designated as MDs. "if appropriate" means if they were a Medical Doctor. Again ALL MDs were designated.

Originally Posted by Poptech

They do not list any BS or MS designations.

Why???
If they are saying that a physical science degree is mandatory, why not attribute that to the signatory rather than sometimes designating them as MD. It makes NO SENSE.

Originally Posted by Poptech

Since all the MDs have either a BS or MS degree....

That based on faith or fact??

Originally Posted by Poptech

but it clearly states:
Those with BS and MS degrees are undesignated or sometimes designated as MD if appropriate.

With absolutely NO explanation whatsoever of why it might be considered "appropriate" to designate MS as MD. Even if a signatory was both an MD and a MS, why not list the science degree since that is a requirement?

Originally Posted by Poptech

"if appropriate" means if they were a Medical Doctor.

That's yet another leap of faith - pure speculation on your part.

You continue to miss the point. Whether that's intentional or otherwise, further discussion would probably be fruitless.