Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

Skeptical Inquirer 31:4

The July/August 2007 issue of Skeptical Inquirer has been released, and as usual there is an assortment of articles from the print mag available freely online:

More free content besides, check out the full contents list of the print mag at the Skeptical Inquirer website.

Editor
  1. CFI
    What is this “probability” coming from and from what evidence? There is no past history of this to base a probability on. It is a high probability that it is just a cycle. You can actually see a trend of periods where it’s cool, warm, cool, warm in a cycle.

    These third party guys need to provide facts to disprove the existing probability of a cycle.

    How come no one is taking the responsibility for being completely wrong about the high amount of hurricanes due to global warming? second strait year in being completely wrong.

    just because you say it it doesn’t make it so.There needs to be proof, evidence, and capable of being tested and retested. SO far there is no science proving global warming. Just a lot of emotions of ice melting and poor polar bears.

    “probability is extremely high that human generated greenhouse gases, with carbon dioxide as the major offender, are the primary cause of global warming and that this global warming will produce harmful climate change”

    “probability

    noun
    1. a measure of how likely it is that some event will occur; a number expressing the ratio of favorable cases to the whole number of cases possible; “the probability that an unbiased coin will fall with the head up is 0.5” “

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal