There's actually more to learn in physics since 1950, certainly more important to the program than stats. It stands to reason that stats would be dropped in favor of more applicable course content. But I'm speculating, I just know they don't have courses on stats because it's either covered in the lecture or you're expected to know it.
That seriously is the way you feel about the issue? and you pursued a degree in physics, why? As mentined before I'm not talking about what you "cover in a lecture," that largely stops mattering much in your first couple of undergrad courses. Its about understanding the results of your experiments, characterizing and performing your own research, and most importantly, properly understanding the work of others. I'm not talking about esoteric statistical theory here, just good solid analysis and comprehensive application.
...Instead of addressing the fact that the 2500 climate scientists actually represent 1/10th of 1% of "the entire scientific community" just in the US, we're going on about MLA formatting.
APA is the preferred scientific formatting, but more to the point, you seem to again be making the types of errors in comprehension that someone with even a HS level grasp of statistics wouldn't make. 2500 scientists is many times over the sample size to provide a very high confidence assessment of the population of global scientists given an overall population size of (according to the AAAS) ~6,000,000 scientists.
The claim is so ridiculous it's not worth examining seriously.
and yet you continually seem to demonstrate a lack of the basic skills and understandings that should be inherent to any basic university degree in physics.
It was your claim and your demand for evidence actually.
it was your claim:
...I think you forget I have an undergrad in physics, global warming or more importantly the effect of CO2 on Earth's temperature is pretty simple stuff. More CO2 in the atmosphere means more heat trapped...
If you stand behind your claims then you must be prepared to support them.
I fully agree,...support your claims or withdraw them.
If you've been to University you know that the only acceptable proof of a degree and convocation is sealed and embossed official transcripts.
I know that even if I received a sealed and embossed offical transcript from some university that I couldn't prove that it was your transcript. But the point is that if you make claims and base your arguments upon personal expertise, it is up to you to provide the evidence that compellingly supports those claims and arguments. The burden of proof lies with those who make the claim. My calling you on your assertions does not shift that burden to me.
You mean like 1/10th of 1%? That kind of "outlier"?
Again, a HS student in a basic Statistics and Probabilities class should understand the difference between an appropriate population sample size and data point outliers,...and yet you still seem to be conflating and confusing these very different but elementary concepts.
