The Truth, Still Inconvenient - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-03-2011, 02:34 PM   #151
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Yes but are you addressing the loaded terminology of "climate change"? Look at your sentence above. Nobody is denying that climate change exists. They are debating how much change comes from anthropogenic CO2 and this is being debated by REAL SCIENTISTS. But that's okay you can talk about people's comprehension all you want but that will likely make it look like you deny there is scientific dissent. Science shouldn't proceed in this bashing kind of way but unfortunately it often can. Wait for information that shows conclusively that positive feedback is the answer and then you'll see less "deniers". As long as peer-reviewed data is showing negative feedback you'll be constantly shocked why "deniers" still exist.

"I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!"
No one is denying that climate change is part of the natural changes that occur to the Earth over centuries and epochs. The scientific theory that human pollution is accelerating that natural climate change is supported by 97% of climate scientists and 90% of all scientists (who are usually pretty skeptical by nature, since you know, they're scientists).
__________________

__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 05:53 PM   #152
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,882
Local Time: 08:27 AM
The main thing the dissenters do is argue that they have the right to dissent. It's a great way to seem like they have a point when they don't.
__________________

__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 09:08 PM   #153
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 06:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
No one is denying that climate change is part of the natural changes that occur to the Earth over centuries and epochs. The scientific theory that human pollution is accelerating that natural climate change is supported by 97% of climate scientists and 90% of all scientists (who are usually pretty skeptical by nature, since you know, they're scientists).
Thanks for ignoring the wikipedia post I put up. Statistical consensus is not science. You're trying to convince people about something that is chaotic and difficult to measure and thinking that a consensus should go to 100%. Forget it. Also it doesn't help when predictions are made and reality shows no "acceleration". It doesn't help that statistical models are "garbage in, and garbage out". The predictions are so bad that the warmers have to say that cooling is also our fault. No wonder belief is decreasing in the general public. There may be some measurable warming from CO2 but nothing catastrophic at all. 2 degrees warming (which we aren't heading for now) would most likely be a benefit and is well withing natural variation on the planet.

Just because people have a lab coat or are full of strong convictions doesn't mean they are right. Appeal to authority is not enough. Any areas of weakness in a theory are the areas that should be tested first. Once the theory has so much detail (like a round earth, and the existence of gravity) then you can laugh people who dissent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
The main thing the dissenters do is argue that they have the right to dissent. It's a great way to seem like they have a point when they don't.
Yeah because that's all dissenters do. I can tell that you didn't read any of the scientific posts made over the past months.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
How much true scientific dissent is out there about ANTHROPOGENIC climate change?
Same as the above post. I posted HOURS of information. You just call it junk science and move on.

What the fuck? Where did the thread "BBC: What happened to global warming?" go?

This old one was pretty fun though:

MERGED-->Gore: Global Warming Worse... + Bono Confesses...

Quote:
Climate change is occurring far more rapidly than even the worst predictions of the UN's Nobel Prize-winning scientific panel on climate change, Al Gore said on Thursday.
Recent evidence shows "the climate crisis is significantly worse and unfolding more rapidly than those on the pessimistic side of the IPCC projections had warned us," climate campaigner and former US vice-president Gore said.

There are now forecasts that the North Pole ice caps may disappear entirely during summer months within five years, he told a gathering at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
Fat chance Al Gore! According to that date it would be by the end of 2012.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 09:13 PM   #154
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:27 AM
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 09:24 PM   #155
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:27 AM
HIV does not cause AIDS

HIV does not cause AIDS. AZT (AIDS medication) causes AIDS - YouTube

I can post hours of reading from Scientists to support this fact.

Like Global Warming it is all about money and control? Who benefits?
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 09:30 PM   #156
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 07:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Just because people have a lab coat or are full of strong convictions doesn't mean they are right. Appeal to authority is not enough. Any areas of weakness in a theory are the areas that should be tested first. Once the theory has so much detail (like a round earth, and the existence of gravity) then you can laugh people who dissent.
It's comments like this that destroy all credibility you pretend to have. You can't disrespect science as a whole yet say that the minority theory is somehow the truth.

The truth is, that you have no repect for science. You've posted hours and hours of opinion that reflects this.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 09:31 PM   #157
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 06:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I was responding to the original wikipedia post about the 98%. I'm not saying people should only look into wikipedia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
It's comments like this that destroy all credibility you pretend to have. You can't disrespect science as a whole yet say that the minority theory is somehow the truth.

The truth is, that you have no repect for science. You've posted hours and hours of opinion that reflects this.
I disrespected science by posting skeptical science? "Science" isn't a person that can feel disrespected. It's not about emotions and what you feel. You have to win the argument. That's what convinces people. When I see lots of positive feedback studies and no negative feedback studies and on top of that we see what is predicted in the models you'll see much more people (including meteorologists and geologists) joining the bandwagon. At that point the only argument would be over the solutions. Right now the science is barely starting. There is so much more to learn about natural variation that to say it's settled sounds creepy.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 09:55 PM   #158
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 07:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Like Global Warming it is all about money and control? Who benefits?
Tomato farmers.

They'll do anything for a longer growing season.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 10:27 PM   #159
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 07:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I disrespected science by posting skeptical science?
Look at what part of your comment I posted. You consider that "skeptical science"? Really?

And you have about a hundred or more statements just like it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
"Science" isn't a person that can feel disrespected. It's not about emotions and what you feel.
Are you serious? Who said anything about emotions?

You do realize that idealogies, practices, procedures can be disrespected? Right?

This is part of the problem right here.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 10:38 PM   #160
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 06:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
You do realize that idealogies, practices, procedures can be disrespected? Right?

This is part of the problem right here.
This is pointless. There are ideologies EVERYWHERE including right inside your mind. The AGW camp is full of ideologies and a large portion of them are left-wing. The problem is not ideologies, the problem is when testing ideologies to REALITY some ideologies evolve and improve and others don't. If someone says "I'm going to pull out a rabbit from a hat" and the trick isn't doesn't work people will think there's something wrong. If scientists (including "Manhattan underwater in the year 2000" James Hansen) make bad predictions with models then maybe there's some data missing from the model that needs to reflect reality. Maybe there are other things effecting the climate that are not reflected in models. This to me is what I see skeptics doing. I don't see how scientific it is to tell people who criticize perceived flaws to stop.

This isn't disrespect and considering all the "denier" "flat-earth" "racist" comparisons from people like Al Gore and his supporters I don't think disrespect is only one way.

__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2011, 11:06 PM   #161
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 07:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
This is pointless.


This is true, but not for the reasons you think...


I wasn't talking about ideology. I was showing you how you don't understand basic word usage. Emotions and humans are not the only things that can be disrespected.

You don't respect the practice of science, you've shown that time and time again. You don't know how it works. You don't respect the scientific procedure.

We have very basic communication issues here, you keep displaying a lack of reading comprehension. And it keeps happening, three times just in the last 24 hours.

So I'm just going to say goodnight

It is indeed pointless.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 08:23 PM   #162
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 06:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post


This is true, but not for the reasons you think...


I wasn't talking about ideology. I was showing you how you don't understand basic word usage. Emotions and humans are not the only things that can be disrespected.

You don't respect the practice of science, you've shown that time and time again. You don't know how it works. You don't respect the scientific procedure.

We have very basic communication issues here, you keep displaying a lack of reading comprehension. And it keeps happening, three times just in the last 24 hours.

So I'm just going to say goodnight

It is indeed pointless.
Yes I have shown respect for science. Anyone who says the science is settled doesn't understand reductionism and is assuming more discoveries won't appear to refute the current line. Remember scientists declared global cooling during the 30 year cool period. It seems every 30 year period there is a panic.

And the fight about "ideology" and "lack of science" and blame continues:

New York Times:

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/20...change-denial/

Skeptical blog:

http://www.australianclimatemadness....sm_machine.pdf

Round and round we go.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2011, 01:03 AM   #163
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
An argument for facism has no merit, whether it is from the Tea Party or from the idiots who produced this video with director Richard Curtis.

The thread has been about scientific research and conclusions. If you want to bring wacky activist groups into it, dredging up the old ecoterrorism meme of the late 80s and 90s then it is to your own detriment.
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2011, 09:46 AM   #164
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 06:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
An argument for facism has no merit, whether it is from the Tea Party or from the idiots who produced this video with director Richard Curtis.

The thread has been about scientific research and conclusions. If you want to bring wacky activist groups into it, dredging up the old ecoterrorism meme of the late 80s and 90s then it is to your own detriment.
No it's not. It's very relevant to those who feel eco-weirdos have political sway and groups like Greenpeace and WWF do interfere by making claims that are supposed to be scientific and then are found to be not the case (especially with WWF and the IPCC).

The scandal deepens – IPCC AR4 riddled with non peer reviewed WWF papers | Watts Up With That?
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2011, 08:24 PM   #165
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 08:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
why? what are your qualifications for believing the few contrary voices to what is an overwhelming consensus?

or is it just easier to do so?

I think it easier to agree with the overwhelming consensus.

The fish swimming the wrong way are the ones in trouble
__________________

__________________
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com