User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 205

  1. #81
    Senior Member htb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    Science relies heavily on making predictions and determining predictable patterns, neither of which succeeding when it comes to predicting climate (and often the weather).
    No, I was agreeing with him.

    The past two years have seen the public trial of "global warming," the theory having dominated mainstream discourse, and early deliberation is encouraging.

    What pseudo-religious hokum. What a waste of resources that could have improved the quality of life. In ten to fifteen years it will lie beside geocentrism, humorism, bleeding, and discarded practices of Earth-worship like it.

  2. #82
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    It always seemed to me they were overestimating the impact of greenhouse gases, considering that volcanic eruptions have a far greater impact than human activity.
    That claim makes no sense.

    Volcanoes create about 200 million tons of CO2 per year, auto and industrial activities create 25 billion tons. They don't even make up 1% of that.

  3. #83
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    That claim makes no sense.

    Volcanoes create about 200 million tons of CO2 per year, auto and industrial activities create 25 billion tons. They don't even make up 1% of that.
    I don't think you know what you're talking about or what Athenian was talking about. Volcanic eruptions have a cooling effect, not a warming effect.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  4. #84
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kangol View Post
    Too bad they're pretty much impossible to do with a claim like "unless we act now, the future climate of the world may become dangerously high."

    I don't know how else to say that the costs of changing standards today are not as high as potentially ruining the ecosystem, and by association, agriculture and economy, of the future. It's a gamble, sure, but like I said once before, I think it's better for the green-environmentalist to be proven wrong than to be proven right.
    Wonderful.

    You don't see people upset with scientists that state a large celestial object will eventually impact Earth, possibly causing the extinction of mankind. You would see people get upset if economies were disrupted in order to pay for missions to prevent it. You would see people get upset if it were politically incorrect to speak out against "the cause". See the difference?
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #85
    Senior Member Kangol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Wonderful.

    You don't see people upset with scientists that state a large celestial object will eventually impact Earth, possibly causing the extinction of mankind. You would see people get upset if economies were disrupted in order to pay for missions to prevent it. You would see people get upset if it were politically incorrect to speak out against "the cause". See the difference?
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. People get upset over things they have some say in and directly and immediately affect them, like the economy, as opposed to asteroids flying through space. Are you saying it's okay for people to get upset and voice their opinion? That's the implication I got. I wouldn't disagree with that; it's just difficult to understand an argument that states three facts and concludes "see the difference?".

    If that is the point you're trying to make, I'd say that a person has every right to state their complaints about whatever it is that's making them upset. However, if they dissent without bothering to understand the reasoning of the opposition and instead believes that they cannot possibly be wrong, they not only have no merit in debate, but will continue to make themselves and others upset by making argumentative noise instead of trying to reconcile views. If debate is unimportant, and still the voices of opposition shout deaf to each other, it's a war of words, and the loudest voices, not the voices of reason, will win.

  6. #86
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kangol View Post
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. People get upset over things they have some say in and directly and immediately affect them, like the economy, as opposed to asteroids flying through space. Are you saying it's okay for people to get upset and voice their opinion? That's the implication I got. I wouldn't disagree with that; it's just difficult to understand an argument that states three facts and concludes "see the difference?".

    If that is the point you're trying to make, I'd say that a person has every right to state their complaints about whatever it is that's making them upset. However, if they dissent without bothering to understand the reasoning of the opposition and instead believes that they cannot possibly be wrong, they not only have no merit in debate, but will continue to make themselves and others upset by making argumentative noise instead of trying to reconcile views. If debate is unimportant, and still the voices of opposition shout deaf to each other, it's a war of words, and the loudest voices, not the voices of reason, will win.
    Yes, and nobody is louder than the global warming believer, environmentalists, and every closely related liberal left camp. Being loud is stupidity, but effective stupidity. It has its uses. Either way it isn't words that win in the end, its the truth that wins. Words of fallacy and ignorance are made hollow upon the advent of truth into the world. These lies of man made global warming will die with time.

  7. #87
    Senior Member Kangol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    Yes, and nobody is louder than the global warming believer, environmentalists, and every closely related liberal left camp. Being loud is stupidity, but effective stupidity. It has its uses. Either way it isn't words that win in the end, its the truth that wins. Words of fallacy and ignorance are made hollow upon the advent of truth into the world. These lies of man made global warming will die with time.
    The bookstores' bestsellers as of late have been crowded with anti-liberal/anti-Obama titles like Arguing With Idiots and Common Sense by Glenn Beck, Culture of Corruption by Michelle Malkin, Catastrophe and Fleeced by Dick Morris, among many more. I see a lot more shouting on this side than the other, and perhaps this then indicates that a lot of people who once supported global warming concerns are now either indifferent or against it. Maybe you're referring to the voices before, when the global warming alert became public and started the green surge. Today, the voices I hear more of are against the idea of global warming, and it's reflected in this thread.

    I have no idea what you mean after you started talking about being loud is useful as effective stupidity. I don't know how that helps your argument, as it implies that you believe it's helpful to the progress of truth to be loudly stupid. The next part, that the truth wins in the end, sounds very much like "the ends justify the means". Is the truth really just the popular opinion? I suppose it is in some ways, but it also means that there is no truth, as things will only remain true until something else replaces it.

  8. #88
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kangol View Post

    I have no idea what you mean after you started talking about being loud is useful as effective stupidity. I don't know how that helps your argument, as it implies that you believe it's helpful to the progress of truth to be loudly stupid. The next part, that the truth wins in the end, sounds very much like "the ends justify the means". Is the truth really just the popular opinion? I suppose it is in some ways, but it also means that there is no truth, as things will only remain true until something else replaces it.
    It is, in TRUTH, the liberal method, whether you want to recognize it or not. The intellectuals who wish to engineer society and economies use such methods, and indeed, the end justifies the means. Those are the kinds of people we are dealing with, and you are not wise to it. Your ignorance is what allows you to be lead like sheep, and that is what they are counting on and including in their calculations. I'd do the same thing. I share the same mentality, and in fact, have been trying to emulate it to further understand it. The intelligent engineer would not willingly reveal such methods, but they do because they are arrogant and because they think you are too stupid to recognize what is going on. That is not far from the truth. However, there are a lot of intelligent people who will take notice and begin fighting back against the waves. Controlling the debate is another of their proffered methods, and "shouting" is one means of doing such. If I were truly arrogant I would reveal my methods and purpose of threads like this. But I wont.

    To further illustrate my point about the political side of the global warming TOOl, a means to an end, let me quote the self proclaimed socialist Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein in a paper he wrote at the University of Chicago:

    "It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid,"
    "We agree that if the United States does spend a great deal on emissions reductions as part of an international agreement, and if the agreement does give particular help to disadvantaged people, considerations of distributive justice support its action, even if better redistributive mechanisms are imaginable.

    "If the United States agrees to participate in a climate change agreement on terms that are not in the nation's interest, but that help the world as a whole, there would be no reason for complaint, certainly if such participation is more helpful to poor nations than conventional foreign-aid alternatives,"

    "If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses."

    The ends is wealth redistribution, for people like Sustein. A great many people share his ambition. However, there are also other individuals and groups with slightly different goals, but they all push the agenda through mutual interests and like minds. The same process that creates any other movement.

    And to further illustrate the arrogance of the political left, here's an excerpt of Bill Maher speaking about healthcare in an interview on the tonight show:

    But yeah, I mean, they are talking about 60 votes. Forget this stuff, 60. We can't get Americans to agree on anything 60%. 60% of people don't believe in evolution in this country. He just needs to drag them to it. Like I just said, they're stupid. Just drag them to this. Get healthcare done.
    And he did it again on CNN, multiple times:

    [YOUTUBE="-p7dlM9ACng"]Bill Maher thinks you're stupid[/YOUTUBE]

    And then he goes on about how he'd prefer China's dictatorship:

    Eyeblast.tv

    MAHER: I'm so jealous of China. You know, it's a dictatorship and they're very efficient and if only we had something like that.

    MAHER: And the Senate, you know, this is where progress seems to go to die. I'm not sure we need one anymore.

    All of this simply illustrating my point about the attitude of the kinds of people who are pushing the global warming agenda.

  9. #89
    Senior Member Kangol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    It is, in TRUTH, the liberal method, whether you want to recognize it or not. The intellectuals who wish to engineer society and economies use such methods, and indeed, the end justifies the means. Those are the kinds of people we are dealing with, and you are not wise to it. Your ignorance is what allows you to be lead like sheep, and that is what they are counting on and including in their calculations. I'd do the same thing. I share the same mentality, and in fact, have been trying to emulate it to further understand it. The intelligent engineer would not willingly reveal such methods, but they do because they are arrogant and because they think you are too stupid to recognize what is going on. That is not far from the truth. However, there are a lot of intelligent people who will take notice and begin fighting back against the waves. Controlling the debate is another of their proffered methods, and "shouting" is one means of doing such. If I were truly arrogant I would reveal my methods and purpose of threads like this. But I wont.

    To further illustrate my point about the political side of the global warming TOOl, a means to an end, let me quote the self proclaimed socialist Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein in a paper he wrote at the University of Chicago:

    "It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid,"
    "We agree that if the United States does spend a great deal on emissions reductions as part of an international agreement, and if the agreement does give particular help to disadvantaged people, considerations of distributive justice support its action, even if better redistributive mechanisms are imaginable.

    "If the United States agrees to participate in a climate change agreement on terms that are not in the nation's interest, but that help the world as a whole, there would be no reason for complaint, certainly if such participation is more helpful to poor nations than conventional foreign-aid alternatives,"

    "If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses."

    The ends is wealth redistribution, for people like Sustein. A great many people share his ambition. However, there are also other individuals and groups with slightly different goals, but they all push the agenda through mutual interests and like minds. The same process that creates any other movement.

    And to further illustrate the arrogance of the political left, here's an excerpt of Bill Maher speaking about healthcare in an interview on the tonight show:



    And he did it again on CNN, multiple times:

    [YOUTUBE="-p7dlM9ACng"]Bill Maher thinks you're stupid[/YOUTUBE]

    And then he goes on about how he'd prefer China's dictatorship:

    Eyeblast.tv

    MAHER: I'm so jealous of China. You know, it's a dictatorship and they're very efficient and if only we had something like that.

    MAHER: And the Senate, you know, this is where progress seems to go to die. I'm not sure we need one anymore.

    All of this simply illustrating my point about the attitude of the kinds of people who are pushing the global warming agenda.
    1) If you really think that only liberals shout for political agenda, I'm going to have to stop debating with you from now on because you've stuck your head so far up your ass your eyeballs and ears have been caked with turd.

    2) Cass Sunstein's statements have no significant relevance to my argument. In the quotes it doesn't seem Sunstein was concerned with the legitimacy of global warming; he was addressing the political after-effects. You can go and get hung up on your war against wealth distribution, but that's not at all what I'm concerned with here. From the start I've been talking about why I believe it to be rational to take precaution regarding global warming, and really, any situation that calls for a "better safe than sorry" sense of responsibility that could potentially affect billions of lives. If that really is the big reason for our arguing, that you're focused on the politics while I'm focused on the science, then I think we should end here. However, I ask that you not use articles citing weather research to make political arguments. It's difficult to separate the two in this debate, but they're two separate arguments.

    3) You know that arrogance you are accusing Bill Maher of? If you think that's annoying, you should read some of your own posts, most of which include some kind of "Liberals are ignorant sheep" and "Only the intelligent people know the truth, like me" statement. I don't really care for Maher's show or his points because they definitely are one-sided. I saw him on a show with Conan O'Brien one day, making a similar statement about America being dumb, and so Obama should follow Bush's lead by just making the decisions for the people instead of trying to please everyone. Whether or not he's made a good point, Maher representing "the kind of people pushing the global warming agenda" is not only an ad hominem attack, but it suggests that you believe people supporting the global warming concern, generally liberal, believe that America should be more like a dictatorship.


    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not trying to be a goof when you sing praises to yourself and anyone who agrees with your beliefs, and that you really want to find out the truth behind things. If you want to be taken more seriously and not heckled by the others before me who poked fun at you, you should stop being so hasty on judging the validity of claims that are contrary to your belief. Starting with an answer (i.e. global warming is crap, conservatives are smart, etc.) and then searching for evidence (i.e. articles supporting your argument, choosing Bill Maher as the liberal spokesperson) is not a good way to make a valid claim. It makes for good rhetoric and exciting news, which unfortunately becomes accepted for the truth in the absence of reason. I know I'm being a complete jackass, but if you really are interested in seeking out truths, something I wholeheartedly support, you need someone to point out the things that will help you make better claims, and it won't be the people who simply agree with you or don't care to argue with you.

  10. #90
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kangol View Post
    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not trying to be a goof when you sing praises to yourself and anyone who agrees with your beliefs, and that you really want to find out the truth behind things. If you want to be taken more seriously and not heckled by the others before me who poked fun at you, you should stop being so hasty on judging the validity of claims that are contrary to your belief. Starting with an answer (i.e. global warming is crap, conservatives are smart, etc.) and then searching for evidence (i.e. articles supporting your argument, choosing Bill Maher as the liberal spokesperson) is not a good way to make a valid claim. It makes for good rhetoric and exciting news, which unfortunately becomes accepted for the truth in the absence of reason. I know I'm being a complete jackass, but if you really are interested in seeking out truths, something I wholeheartedly support, you need someone to point out the things that will help you make better claims, and it won't be the people who simply agree with you or don't care to argue with you.
    There was an interesting article on this: Is Conservatism Brain-Dead?

    The article pointed out how the right has lost a lot of its intellectual firepower (like William F. Buckley Jr.) and now the populists (Rush, Ann Coulter) have taken the leadership roles. Which is great for "rah-rah" emotionalism for the true believers, but makes those on the outside looking in wonder if all the conservatives have lost their marbles.

Similar Threads

  1. What is some viable proof of Global Warming?
    By Blackout in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 05-25-2016, 09:40 PM
  2. Data on Global Warming is being Faked!!!!!!!!!
    By Mal12345 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 09-28-2015, 11:41 AM
  3. The Great Global Warming Swindle
    By reason in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 07-08-2015, 12:04 PM
  4. Conspiracy theories cluster - global warming hoax is among them.
    By Magic Poriferan in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 06:42 AM
  5. Global warming
    By Nocapszy in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 04-09-2008, 11:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO