Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:

October 16, 2004

"Tim K." wrote:

almost elegant in their simplicity, approaching the level of

natural beauty. All you do is claim superior knowledge to everyone in
soft science domains (environmentalism, biology, ecology)

What is a "soft science" exactly?

I just gave you several examples.

If I design a study of vegetation (and I
have) and I use a fully random design and non-parametric statistics to test
hypotheses, and write a mathematical model to explain the variation in
species composition along an environmental gradient, what exactly is "soft
science" about it?

Your claim of explanation.

And what would you consider "technical"?

Hard sciences.

You mean the sciences you find hard to understand?

of which we as
a species and a civilization know almost nothing about, in global scale,
certainly on cosmic scale.

There's that ego again - if *you* don't understand it, "we as  a species and
a civilization know almost nothing".

My claim wasn't based upon my understanding of any particular thing, rather that
our totality of understanding of the cosmos and the planet Earth is extremely
limited,

Really? Projection noted, ignoramus.

a claim that is trivially supported by the evidence

What evidence would that be, kook? The insight given to you by your alien buddies?

Even more disturbing is that you are using initial estimations - before
hardly any checks had been cut or any bills for repairs had been submitted.

That isn't necessary to support the conclusion,

So a guess is as good as proof as far as you are concerned then?

a simple perusal of the evidence
clearly supports the claim.

Again, what evidence?

Your nearly anal insistence on absolutism is
disturbing, however, but I'm used to it by now.

Just as you are getting used to being called a kook. Or you should be by now anyway.

That is, you are using an estimation of an estimation, to do an absolute
comparison.

The hurricane season isn't over yet, and a relative comparison is implicit.

The key words are activity and intensity. Now ask yourself, what do tropical
cyclones do, that we can measure and estimate? Pick any metric, and then try to
support the initial claim that the 2004 Atlantic basin hurricane season has been
relatively mild.

Physical, economic and social metrics all appear to agree,

Appearances can be deceiving. That's why scientists don't rely on them.

that this.particular
hurricane season activity has been relatively intense.

Tell that to the survivors of the 1900 Galveston hurricane or the survivors of the four hurricanes that hit Texas in 1886. The problem is, you are ignorant of history, Little Tommy. The last few decades have seen unnusually mild hurricane seasons. We are getting back into a more active pattern. Nothing terribly unnusual about it, not when you take the long view anyway. Hurricane season is going to suck for you on your shitty little island for the next few decades.

But inquiring minds still want to know, what evidence to you to enlighten us and
to support your claim that aliens do *NOT* exist? That would be unprecedented,
if true.

Your arguing in support of the claim that this hurricane season has not been
relatively intense,

It hasn't. The position of the Bermuda High which steers the hurricanes is the only thing out of the ordinary about this season. But then that isn't really all that out of the ordinary either, since it wonders around on an irregular 30+ year cycle.

and that aliens do *NOT* exist, clearly puts you in the
realm of crackpots,

Tim is not in the same realm as you.

and we all know that debating crackpots like you is
scientifically unproductive, but the commentary is somewhat entertaining. So
please, keep posting, we love you Conchy Joes, and we love Florida. Our prayers
are with you.

Oh, innit sweet? Little Tommy is praying for me. I guess all good "scientists" like him rely on the power of prayer.

--
The Evil Michael Davis(tm)
http://www.mdpub.com/scopeworks/
http://skepticult.org Member #264-70198-536
Member #33 1/3 of The "I Have Been Killfiled By Tommy" Club

"There's a sucker born every minute" - David Hannum (often erroneously attributed to P. T. Barnum