tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post3406952274320478234..comments2023-11-05T20:57:32.974+10:00Comments on Tug Boat Potemkin: More Discredited Documentary Links than You Can Possibly StomachGummo Trotskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13793212800261216868noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-35533321758962057222007-08-22T00:17:00.000+10:002007-08-22T00:17:00.000+10:00I agree he left the data out that didn't back his ...I agree he left the data out that didn't back his point, but that doesn't make the overall graph, even with the new data included uncompelling. It only undermines his character, not the graph. You want to use his character to undermine the data, which is itself bad science.<BR/><BR/>My point is that even if you include the new data, where the lines diverge, the graph would still have a positive Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-11476837661996876272007-07-20T12:09:00.000+10:002007-07-20T12:09:00.000+10:00Stephen,Now you're just parroting Durkin.If you ca...Stephen,<BR/><BR/>Now you're just parroting Durkin.<BR/><BR/>If you can't answer my point - that Durkin's graph conveniently omitted new data that didn't support his case - without misrepresenting it as a failure in my understanding of science, you're wasting your time.<BR/><BR/>If all you can come up with is <EM>ad hominem</EM> arguments and cock-eyed analogies, you've got nothing.<BR/><BR/>Gummo Trotskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13793212800261216868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-27381470900921240442007-07-20T11:08:00.000+10:002007-07-20T11:08:00.000+10:00Only just saw that you linked to me, oh well. you ...Only just saw that you linked to me, oh well. you misspelled my name, but I forgive you. ;)<BR/><BR/>My point was that when doing statistical analysis for positive, negative or no correlation between two data sets, you don't disregard the first peice of the data, any more than you disregard the new data.<BR/><BR/>Your argument is just as fallacious - you say you can't disregard the new data, but Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-9897262768919835702007-07-17T08:00:00.000+10:002007-07-17T08:00:00.000+10:00no anger at all. i was delighted that ABC had the...no anger at all. i was delighted that ABC had the guts to show the program and thought Jones did an excellent job pointing out Durkin's many faults in his documentary.<BR/><BR/>I only wish all political doc makers could be exposed to the same thorough analysis.pommygranatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06913108500217273049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-82186883857694834752007-07-15T23:25:00.000+10:002007-07-15T23:25:00.000+10:00Someone from the lunar right in the audience refer...Someone from the lunar right in the audience referred to the young prof David Karoly as "that garrulous individual in the middle". <BR/><BR/>I got a whiff of the steveatthepub from that. It's the intellectual discussion by way of let's step outside and sort out this global warming once and for all, man to man.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-77410304311318729072007-07-15T09:21:00.000+10:002007-07-15T09:21:00.000+10:00"Fumigated" perhaps?Reading your post over, I dete..."Fumigated" perhaps?<BR/><BR/>Reading your post over, I detect a distinct whiff of anger in your enumeration of five ways in which the ABC editors hedged themselves. But maybe I'm just having another grumpy morning.Gummo Trotskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13793212800261216868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3879765.post-2116401533481304862007-07-15T04:41:00.000+10:002007-07-15T04:41:00.000+10:00I think 'incensed' is a little strong, Gummo.'The ...I think 'incensed' is a little strong, Gummo.<BR/><BR/>'The editors, made a brave choice, sensibly covered their backs'pommygranatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06913108500217273049noreply@blogger.com