If the majority of a group of mathematicians told you...?

Question

That if you were to wager your entire net worth($, house, car, etc...) they were 90% certain that you would win the Powerball Jackpot would you make that bet?

Now compare that statement with the UN Commisions report on climate change. Just because a consensus of the scientists on the panel agreed on the 90% likelyhood wording are you willing to put out economy on the line based on those odds?

our economy, not out economy

To all of you that questioned about the effects of our economy, I am talking about if we ratified the Kyoto treaty. The treaty puts more burden on the United States and does not even include China who is the worst polluter in the world(amount of pollution created vs output of goods and services). By making the global playing field uneven for the likes of China, the fastest growing economy on the planet, we make it a much more difficult market for our own manufacturers who are lready having a tough time competing on a global scale.

JJ - Michael Crichton states he does not believe Global Warming is caused by man in the appendix of his book "State of Fear". IInterestingly enough he does state he believes there is currently believe there is a climate change issue, but it needs more study.

Oh, and thanks to all of you on both sides that actually gave thoughtful answers. There have been a lot of good points from both sides. 28%Brain, this doesn't include you. If you think that calling Limbaugh a name makes you sound clever you are way off base.

Answer 1

Well, to compare it to the UN Commissions report, you would start off only with mathematicians who believed in playing the lottery, and excluding all mathematicians who think the lottery is stupid, and you also include bureaucrats who support the lottery to help drive the conclusions.

That's a more accurate depiction of the UN Commission.

So, NOW would you believe them?

Answer 2

You have over simplified the question and the powerball jackpot does not make a good analogy. Instead of winning the powerball, the question could read if the majority of mathemeticians told you to wager your entire net worth etc, or there would be a good probability that your grnadchildren would not survive might be better. Instead of wagering the house most reports are simply suggesting we reduce emissions. there are a number of these emission reducers which are actually cost saving to the consumer, such as switching to compact fluorescents and purchasing a car with better gas milage.

Answer 3

I'm not sure the Power ball Jackpot is the best example you could come up with. I'm sure the Power ball is worth enough money to wager my entire net worth. You must be presuming I'm very rich. Or more likely, you haven't done the math. Say a Power ball is worth $100 million. The mean expectant value would be $100,000,000 x 0.9 x 0.51= $45.9 million. Which is worth a hell of alot more than my net worth.

Answer 4

Either one is a SUCKER BET.
Your odds are better putting 1 bullet in a revolver,spining the cylinder and taking aim at your own head.
The Un sees the US as too powerfull and would love to trim us down ,economically and militarily.
Meanwhile , China and India build huge militaries and industrial bases .
No pollution controls over there.

Answer 5

A balanced opinion.. hmm... would that is acceptable right here? looks to me that each and all of us you prefer is acknowledgement via truthfully all people (regrettably that's by no ability going to take place, even in an completely male worldwide) that "men are extra acceptable," and it upsets you while somebody would not agree. this is the character of the EGO. (conversing of which, why are you no longer problematic the fact that maximum men's IQ are plenty larger than your guy or woman? feels like an identical factor to be easy. truly valuable, given the generalizations made, that there is sufficient women persons with a plenty larger IQ too). ... no longer even the factor ... i think of you will desire to do a double address each and each of the cyber web derived assumptions that your ideas has pieced collectively, and realize that, if there became no one to oppose you, you will by no ability have given a shiit interior the 1st place. Oh nicely, rape and pornography exists :) deal with your low self-worth and are available lower back.

Answer 6

The so called effect of global warming is only effected by pollution to such a small % that its hardly worth noting and other factors are much more responsible for the warming we are experiencing . We have a much higher level of activity on the sun recently which is contributing to the warming .

Answer 7

No, especially since some of those same people say that we can't even stop global warming in the first place.

Here's something I've always wondered. Who was in Antarctica, the Sahara Desert, the Amazon Rain Forest, etc. recording temperatures 150 years ago to supply data for an "Average Global Temperature" measurement?

....??

Answer 8

it sure beats being the ones left behind because we couldn't take a chance. Nobody would have given us a 90% accuracy on our intelligence that put us in Iraq, but we took that chance, right? How does being conservative with your footprint on this planet affect anyone negatively? We have always been a leader in the world, and now, our science and math are sorley lacking, on account of the republicans (stem cell research and global warming) I would rather take a chance on the fututre, than take a chance on death and destruction

Answer 9

Great question, great analogy.

I have $5 worth of quick picks riding on $32 mil, because I hardly ever play lotto, ( its just and idiot tax)

this whole global warming, climate change non- issue is just that.

Scientists who dispute global warming/climate change hysteria:

Timothy Ball
Yuri A. Izrael
Michael Crichton
Richard Lindzen

I'm sure there are more out there!!!

Answer 10

No. I'd want to see their research and ask them what their case is, and if it was simply a matter of a bunch of people with degrees deciding to agree on something, I'd walk away.

And if they were a UN-convened group of mathematicians most of whom with significant involvement in ideological pursuits with the same agenda that will be served by doing what they're pushing to be done now, I would dismiss them out of hand.

Next...