Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4
Discussion
jjlynn27 said:
LongQ said:
I think you have entirely missed the points I was making. Either that or misunderstood them. Perhaps deliberately to make make the point you wished to make? I say that as you did not answer mine or even seem to directly engage.
Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
Thanks for the career advice. Now, take a deep breath. Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
The link between autism and MMR was brought up by moronic website quoted. Quite a few times. The whole 'omg vaccinations are bad, mkay' is perpetuated by morons. Without exception. That site is written by morons for even bigger morons. And I'm being kind here. Yes, some kids, very rarely, will have a reaction, which is usually very easily treated. The benefits of vaccinations, wait, am I actually talking about benefits of vaccination in the 21st century?
I don't care if adults chose not to have vaccinations. I do care very much if, due to their incalculable stupidity they inflict harm on an innocent child.
As per the previous post, I don't care much about global warming, but linking a site like that, deserves all the ridicule it gets.
jjlynn27 said:
LongQ said:
I think you have entirely missed the points I was making. Either that or misunderstood them. Perhaps deliberately to make make the point you wished to make? I say that as you did not answer mine or even seem to directly engage.
Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
Thanks for the career advice. Now, take a deep breath. Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
The link between autism and MMR was brought up by moronic website quoted. Quite a few times. The whole 'omg vaccinations are bad, mkay' is perpetuated by morons. Without exception. That site is written by morons for even bigger morons. And I'm being kind here. Yes, some kids, very rarely, will have a reaction, which is usually very easily treated. The benefits of vaccinations, wait, am I actually talking about benefits of vaccination in the 21st century?
I don't care if adults chose not to have vaccinations. I do care very much if, due to their incalculable stupidity they inflict harm on an innocent child.
As per the previous post, I don't care much about global warming, but linking a site like that, deserves all the ridicule it gets.
You. An EU promoter of Green Energy?
Then WTF are you doing commenting in this thread?
Once more you're
Trolling, just trolling.
Apologies to Flanagan & Allen
jjlynn27 said:
LongQ said:
I think you have entirely missed the points I was making. Either that or misunderstood them. Perhaps deliberately to make make the point you wished to make? I say that as you did not answer mine or even seem to directly engage.
Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
Thanks for the career advice. Now, take a deep breath. Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
The link between autism and MMR was brought up by moronic website quoted. Quite a few times. The whole 'omg vaccinations are bad, mkay' is perpetuated by morons. Without exception. That site is written by morons for even bigger morons. And I'm being kind here. Yes, some kids, very rarely, will have a reaction, which is usually very easily treated. The benefits of vaccinations, wait, am I actually talking about benefits of vaccination in the 21st century?
I don't care if adults chose not to have vaccinations. I do care very much if, due to their incalculable stupidity they inflict harm on an innocent child.
As per the previous post, I don't care much about global warming, but linking a site like that, deserves all the ridicule it gets.
My breathing is just fine thanks.
You should probably be careful about calling people morons by the way. There are some manipulators out there beyond movie land who take offence and it seems the court system recognises the potential benefits from the fees to be gathered from such cases.
Apart from that I actually agree with you about marginal, at best, web site. The web, being what it is and its denizens pandering to the persistent frailties of humanity, will reflect that in content and, where feasible, deed.
It can afford to when the majority of humanity is tied to some sort of belief system that may or may not be allied in some way to what we call science as a collective name for a certain category of human "knowledge". It seems to be a knowledge still enveloped in forms of mysticism. I'm sure many confuse astrology for astronomy. It possibly helps that Astrologers are paid to publish in many, if not all, media outlets every day or every issue. That's not quite so true of Astronomy although some might argue that within a lifetime of anyone currently on earth neither really matters.
Both activities, at least as claimed, rely on movements of the same starry components as the other and as far as I am aware they likely share the same movement data even though applied in different models.
Only one of the historically learned activities claims to offer individual guidance about the future that can be applied at a personal level.
Results of the deliberation are not, apparently, in complete agreement across the different models. I suppose there would be no market if they were.
So there is room for differences and any proof is a long time away. But it's harmless fun, right? So no need to make a fuss about it. Politically its a good idea to make sure that both continue unfettered, one as a distraction as an exhibit related to how clever one's "people" are and the other to "make them happy".
There are other examples of course but they are probably best left aside for now.
Edited by LongQ on Tuesday 4th April 23:31
LongQ said:
jjlynn27 said:
LongQ said:
I think you have entirely missed the points I was making. Either that or misunderstood them. Perhaps deliberately to make make the point you wished to make? I say that as you did not answer mine or even seem to directly engage.
Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
Thanks for the career advice. Now, take a deep breath. Why did you bring up autism?
Using a site like PH (for anything) is pretty stupid in the overall context of humanity. It doesn't stop us thought does it?
In the end it often comes down to a passion or a belief or something that mixes the two - probably best categorised as an obsession in that case.
You should probably try politics as a career. Such a ferocious self belief would probably fit well. The subject matter likely would not matter. The ability to fully divert the discussion into areas of your choosing can be quickly refined. If you are lucky people won't be able to spot the diversion.
On the other hand Law training perhaps works best in politics and for that you probably need to be able to argue any side without necessarily accepting the "evidence" at all. I'm not sure that would suit on a short term task basis.
The link between autism and MMR was brought up by moronic website quoted. Quite a few times. The whole 'omg vaccinations are bad, mkay' is perpetuated by morons. Without exception. That site is written by morons for even bigger morons. And I'm being kind here. Yes, some kids, very rarely, will have a reaction, which is usually very easily treated. The benefits of vaccinations, wait, am I actually talking about benefits of vaccination in the 21st century?
I don't care if adults chose not to have vaccinations. I do care very much if, due to their incalculable stupidity they inflict harm on an innocent child.
As per the previous post, I don't care much about global warming, but linking a site like that, deserves all the ridicule it gets.
My breathing is just fine thanks.
You should probably be careful about calling people morons by the way. There are some manipulators out there beyond movie land who take offence and it seems the court system recognises the potential benefits from the fees to be gathered from such cases.
Apart from that I actually agree with you about marginal, at best, web site. The web, being what it is and its denizens pandering to the persistent frailties of humanity, will reflect that in content and, where feasible, deed.
It can afford to when the majority of humanity is tied to some sort of belief system that may or may not be allied in some way to what we call science as a collective name for a certain category of human "knowledge". It seems to be a knowledge still enveloped in forms of mysticism. I'm sure many confuse astrology for astronomy. It possibly helps that Astrologers are paid to publish in many, if not all, media outlets every day or every issue. That's not quite so true of Astronomy although some might argue that within a lifetime of anyone currently on earth neither really matters.
Both activities, at least as claimed, rely on movements of the same starry components as the other and as far as I am aware they likely share the same movement data even though applied in different models.
Only one of the historically learned activities claims to offer individual guidance about the future that can be applied as a personal level.
Results of the deliberation are not, apparently, in complete agreement across the different models. I suppose there would be no market it they were.
So there is room for differences and any proof is a long time away. But it's harmless fun, right? So no need to make a fuss about it. Politically its a good idea to make sure that both continue unfettered, one as a distraction as an exhibit related to how clever one's "people" are and the other to "make them happy".
There are other examples of course but they are probably best left aside for now.
Science vs Dogma on Climate (don't waste time guessing which is which):
"It is increasingly clear that the battle over global warming consists of science on one side, and politically-motivated dogma on the other. Ken Haapala of the Science and Environmental Policy Project offers historical context"
"The Charney report included some of the nation’s best meteorologists and climate researchers and the report recognized that laboratory tests demonstrated that the direct influence on global temperatures from doubling carbon dioxide would be minor – possibly unmeasurable"
That fits with the data, not with the dogma. More at the link.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/04/scie...
"It is increasingly clear that the battle over global warming consists of science on one side, and politically-motivated dogma on the other. Ken Haapala of the Science and Environmental Policy Project offers historical context"
"The Charney report included some of the nation’s best meteorologists and climate researchers and the report recognized that laboratory tests demonstrated that the direct influence on global temperatures from doubling carbon dioxide would be minor – possibly unmeasurable"
That fits with the data, not with the dogma. More at the link.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/04/scie...
LongQ said:
You're welcome.
My breathing is just fine thanks.
You should probably be careful about calling people morons by the way. There are some manipulators out there beyond movie land who take offence and it seems the court system recognises the potential benefits from the fees to be gathered from such cases.
Apart from that I actually agree with you about marginal, at best, web site. The web, being what it is and its denizens pandering to the persistent frailties of humanity, will reflect that in content and, where feasible, deed.
It can afford to when the majority of humanity is tied to some sort of belief system that may or may not be allied in some way to what we call science as a collective name for a certain category of human "knowledge". It seems to be a knowledge still enveloped in forms of mysticism. I'm sure many confuse astrology for astronomy. It possibly helps that Astrologers are paid to publish in many, if not all, media outlets every day or every issue. That's not quite so true of Astronomy although some might argue that within a lifetime of anyone currently on earth neither really matters.
Both activities, at least as claimed, rely on movements of the same starry components as the other and as far as I am aware they likely share the same movement data even though applied in different models.
Only one of the historically learned activities claims to offer individual guidance about the future that can be applied as a personal level.
Results of the deliberation are not, apparently, in complete agreement across the different models. I suppose there would be no market it they were.
So there is room for differences and any proof is a long time away. But it's harmless fun, right? So no need to make a fuss about it. Politically its a good idea to make sure that both continue unfettered, one as a distraction as an exhibit related to how clever one's "people" are and the other to "make them happy".
There are other examples of course but they are probably best left aside for now.
You seem to be doling out advice that no one asked for. My breathing is just fine thanks.
You should probably be careful about calling people morons by the way. There are some manipulators out there beyond movie land who take offence and it seems the court system recognises the potential benefits from the fees to be gathered from such cases.
Apart from that I actually agree with you about marginal, at best, web site. The web, being what it is and its denizens pandering to the persistent frailties of humanity, will reflect that in content and, where feasible, deed.
It can afford to when the majority of humanity is tied to some sort of belief system that may or may not be allied in some way to what we call science as a collective name for a certain category of human "knowledge". It seems to be a knowledge still enveloped in forms of mysticism. I'm sure many confuse astrology for astronomy. It possibly helps that Astrologers are paid to publish in many, if not all, media outlets every day or every issue. That's not quite so true of Astronomy although some might argue that within a lifetime of anyone currently on earth neither really matters.
Both activities, at least as claimed, rely on movements of the same starry components as the other and as far as I am aware they likely share the same movement data even though applied in different models.
Only one of the historically learned activities claims to offer individual guidance about the future that can be applied as a personal level.
Results of the deliberation are not, apparently, in complete agreement across the different models. I suppose there would be no market it they were.
So there is room for differences and any proof is a long time away. But it's harmless fun, right? So no need to make a fuss about it. Politically its a good idea to make sure that both continue unfettered, one as a distraction as an exhibit related to how clever one's "people" are and the other to "make them happy".
There are other examples of course but they are probably best left aside for now.
What astrologers? I was talking about site linked in this thread and why the people who take anything out of it are morons, IMO.
'future that can be applied as a personal level'?
jjlynn27 said:
You seem to be doling out advice that no one asked for.
I'm not surprised that you would have at least some recognition of that.But then surely that is expected on the internet (and especially PH). Is that not why we are here?
Is that not what you were doing earlier?
jjlynn27 said:
What astrologers? I was talking about site linked in this thread and why the people who take anything out of it are morons, IMO.
Because arguing the toss about a "moron" site is more than a little pointless on what many would regard as a "moron populated" site. The astrologer/astronomer naming and understanding mis-attribution is not uncommon and astrology seems popular enough to make quite a few people a significant living on the basis of nothing of real value. It's a human trait to value nothing.
As far as I know it is an example that compares aspects of scientific endeavour with a form of belief system studying the same subject matter - sort of. The belief system seems to be the more popular overall.
Humans seem to like belief systems, including, sometimes, the belief in "science" of some sorts without question.
jjlynn27 said:
'future that can be applied as a personal level'?
Thank you for pointing this out. A typo. I also have spotted and corrected another in the original post.'future that can be applied at a personal level'?
Edited by LongQ on Wednesday 5th April 12:11
said:
Because arguing the toss about a "moron" site is more then a little pointless...
Leaving the rest for another day, that is 100% spot on.Accurate information published anywhere remains accurate.
Shooting the messenger remains one of the weakest forms of response it's possible to make, strongly suggestive of the respondent having absolutely nothing of actual relevance on offer.
The following illustration took about 2 minutes in total and represents something I suggested previously.
These are Maxwell's Equations and earlier this morning they were written on a piece of toilet paper then published down the loo.
As we all know at approx 0905 hrs and later, the universe did not descend into darkness.
You just can't beat a bit of div and curl.
Meanwhile...twerk for climate justice? Aye!
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:AN...
LongQ said:
meaningless waffle.
You keep repeating the same meaningless drivel. I've explained why that site, just like Infowars, is the site where nutjobs get their "information". Not sure that I can explain that any differently. If you are going to do any research, you'll want to know that provenance of your story is credible. A bunch of nutjobs selling freedom healthy foods and spouting 'Big Pharma' conspiracy theories hardly qualifies. Still no idea what astrologers have to do with anything.
Anyhow, it's time to let the thread continue.
Did we miss this, in all the recent excitement?
Cooling is the new warming and it's worse than previously thought! It's in The Guardian!! There's an almost 50% chance something 'could happen''!!! It's climate disruption!!!! We are all responsible!!!!! Don't panic!!!!!!
"Drastic cooling in North Atlantic beyond worst fears, scientists warn"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/2...
Cooling is the new warming and it's worse than previously thought! It's in The Guardian!! There's an almost 50% chance something 'could happen''!!! It's climate disruption!!!! We are all responsible!!!!! Don't panic!!!!!!
"Drastic cooling in North Atlantic beyond worst fears, scientists warn"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/2...
turbobloke said:
Did we miss this, in all the recent excitement?
Cooling is the new warming and it's worse than previously thought! It's in The Guardian!! There's an almost 50% chance something 'could happen''!!! It's climate disruption!!!! We are all responsible!!!!! Don't panic!!!!!!
"Drastic cooling in North Atlantic beyond worst fears, scientists warn"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/2...
they analysed 40 climate models .how about they get of their lazy arses and out into the field instead of sitting in front of a computer spewing out hypothetical situations based on the numbers they put into it.Cooling is the new warming and it's worse than previously thought! It's in The Guardian!! There's an almost 50% chance something 'could happen''!!! It's climate disruption!!!! We are all responsible!!!!! Don't panic!!!!!!
"Drastic cooling in North Atlantic beyond worst fears, scientists warn"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/2...
the north atlantic will be cooling from now on, but that is what is expected to happen now we are past the peak of the amo ,anyone arguing otherwise or trying to implicate cagw nonscience as the cause needs a good hard kick in the balls ,several times.
turbobloke said:
Did we miss this, in all the recent excitement?
Cooling is the new warming and it's worse than previously thought! It's in The Guardian!! There's an almost 50% chance something 'could happen''!!! It's climate disruption!!!! We are all responsible!!!!! Don't panic!!!!!!
"Drastic cooling in North Atlantic beyond worst fears, scientists warn"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/2...
Amazing article. However, a more important subject. Has any one chucked a few coppers into their begging bucket yet? Got to pay for George Moonbat's articles somehow !!!Cooling is the new warming and it's worse than previously thought! It's in The Guardian!! There's an almost 50% chance something 'could happen''!!! It's climate disruption!!!! We are all responsible!!!!! Don't panic!!!!!!
"Drastic cooling in North Atlantic beyond worst fears, scientists warn"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/2...
johnfm said:
I think we won't be able to settle this issue for another 25-30 years of data.
Assuming that's not entirely political...We've already got nearly 200 years' worth of data from industrialisation onwards, taking 1820 as the starting point. Some would opt for an earlier start in the late 1700s but 1820 will do.
The science and maths of the claimed agw process make it clear that any initial increase in carbon dioxide levels will have a far greater impact than additions later on.
Even with diddled near-surface data there's no visible causal human signal at this point. The agw hypothesis is a lost cause.
Without political patronage this brand of junkscience would have died long ago, hence the value in this thread given that it's all about politics.
So perhaps the comment was entirely political. If the ~30 years or more idea is a political one then this would give time for many of the politicians supporting this bunk to retire/die of old age, and for the public to reach a point of total rather than partial ridicule towards a naked emperor...in which case it's possible given that the next ~30 years are still (according to solar and temperature data) taking the planet towards a Dalton or Maunder event.
A bit on the long side but possible given how the perpetrators are capable of launching nonscience win-win myths where e.g. agw means more hurricanes and agw means fewer hurricanes so the emperor continues to walk about butt naked for longer than previously thought whatever happens.
It would be a depressingly long time to wait for the 'hidden in plain sight' admission to gain traction - see below - and for $trillions to be wasted with the average citizen in developing countries kept in poverty for longer than necessary as their rulers join the western elite and wealthy land owners in pocketing the spoils.
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2017/3/29/d...
This video gets off to a good start and promises a rollocking good listen.
Only managed 20 minutes now, but I'll be back...
This video gets off to a good start and promises a rollocking good listen.
Only managed 20 minutes now, but I'll be back...
UN report: Clean power is up, costs are down
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3951...
The world added record levels of renewable energy capacity in 2016, according to the UN.
But the bill was almost a quarter lower than the previous year, thanks to the plunging cost of renewables.
Investment in renewables capacity was roughly double that in fossil fuels, says the report from UN Environment.
It follows news that the cost of offshore wind power has fallen by around a third since 2012 – far faster than expected.
But the report’s authors sound the alarm that just as costs are plunging, some major nations are scaling back their green energy investments.
This, they say, reduces the likelihood of meeting the Paris climate agreement.
Except they still don't work when their isn't any wind
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3951...
The world added record levels of renewable energy capacity in 2016, according to the UN.
But the bill was almost a quarter lower than the previous year, thanks to the plunging cost of renewables.
Investment in renewables capacity was roughly double that in fossil fuels, says the report from UN Environment.
It follows news that the cost of offshore wind power has fallen by around a third since 2012 – far faster than expected.
But the report’s authors sound the alarm that just as costs are plunging, some major nations are scaling back their green energy investments.
This, they say, reduces the likelihood of meeting the Paris climate agreement.
Except they still don't work when their isn't any wind
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff