| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 144374 | 2017-09-26 01:30:00 | It's Getting Serious! | B.M. (505) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1439766 | 2017-09-28 05:08:00 | Pulease, BM, stop wasting your time and ours by firing out an endless stream of 'gotchas', and spend some time trying to find out what the global warning/climate change issue is all about. I have had encounters with a few of our local deniers, including one prominent gent with (quite genuine) scientific credentials. They all have the same characteristics - strong opinions based on inadequate understanding. All simply do not know as much as they think they know. The afore-mentioned gent claimed that climate models were wrong because they didn't take into account the fact that the earth is round! Take a page from Gareth Morgan's book (Poles Apart) - he started as a sceptic, talked to some climate scientists, and came to the conclusion that they were right. Salvation awaits you, too, if you are prepared to seek it. | Jayess64 (8703) | ||
| 1439767 | 2017-09-28 07:25:00 | Pulease, BM, stop wasting your time and ours by firing out an endless stream of 'gotchas', and spend some time trying to find out what the global warning/climate change issue is all about. I have had encounters with a few of our local deniers, including one prominent gent with (quite genuine) scientific credentials. They all have the same characteristics - strong opinions based on inadequate understanding. All simply do not know as much as they think they know. The afore-mentioned gent claimed that climate models were wrong because they didn't take into account the fact that the earth is round! Take a page from Gareth Morgan's book (Poles Apart) - he started as a sceptic, talked to some climate scientists, and came to the conclusion that they were right. Salvation awaits you, too, if you are prepared to seek it. Well Jayess, maybe you would like to tell me your credentials and explain why I am wrong? As for suggesting I should read Gareth Morgan’s book, all I can say is – Meow. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1439768 | 2017-09-28 22:10:00 | Pulease, BM, stop wasting your time and ours by firing out an endless stream of 'gotchas', and spend some time trying to find out what the global warning/climate change issue is all about. I have had encounters with a few of our local deniers, including one prominent gent with (quite genuine) scientific credentials. They all have the same characteristics - strong opinions based on inadequate understanding. All simply do not know as much as they think they know. The afore-mentioned gent claimed that climate models were wrong because they didn't take into account the fact that the earth is round! Take a page from Gareth Morgan's book (Poles Apart) - he started as a sceptic, talked to some climate scientists, and came to the conclusion that they were right. Salvation awaits you, too, if you are prepared to seek it. And theres the real problem. when you & the propagandists need to resort to emotive name calling , "deniers" , that shows me the level of the thought process involved when the propagandists get caught fudging and altering data the I'm right, everyone else is an idiot attitude the blatant lie of "all scientists agree" the cherry picking of data (from both sides) those with strong views on this subject (both sides) simply wont drop their bias & wont take a reasoned, rational approach to it. We get the same type of reasoning & blinkered outlook as held by conspiracy theorists . |
1101 (13337) | ||
| 1439769 | 2017-09-29 03:43:00 | Well Jayess, maybe you would like to tell me your credentials and explain why I am wrong? As for suggesting I should read Gareth Morgan’s book, all I can say is – Meow. Well B.M., my credentials are rather irrelevant here since I am not the one issuing proclamations, but a career in physics has helped me get some understanding of what the climate scientists are on about. That you are wrong, I have no doubt, because you constantly reject evidence provided by direct observation without providing any cogent reasons for your rejection. Why you are wrong, I can only speculate. You could try googling 'Dunning-Kruger Effect'. It makes interesting reading. Your reaction to Morgan's book speaks for itself. What more can I say? |
Jayess64 (8703) | ||
| 1439770 | 2017-09-29 20:58:00 | Well B.M., my credentials are rather irrelevant here since I am not the one issuing proclamations, but a career in physics has helped me get some understanding of what the climate scientists are on about. That you are wrong, I have no doubt, because you constantly reject evidence provided by direct observation without providing any cogent reasons for your rejection. Why you are wrong, I can only speculate. You could try googling 'Dunning-Kruger Effect'. It makes interesting reading. Your reaction to Morgan's book speaks for itself. What more can I say? :lol: I’ll read Meow Morgan’s book when read THIS (www.lavoisier.com.au). |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1439771 | 2017-09-30 05:33:00 | And theres the real problem. when you & the propagandists need to resort to emotive name calling , "deniers" , that shows me the level of the thought process involved when the propagandists get caught fudging and altering data the I'm right, everyone else is an idiot attitude the blatant lie of "all scientists agree" the cherry picking of data (from both sides) those with strong views on this subject (both sides) simply wont drop their bias & wont take a reasoned, rational approach to it. We get the same type of reasoning & blinkered outlook as held by conspiracy theorists . I'll keep things blunt, short, and simple. 1). 'Deniers' is a pretty good term for describing people who don't believe that humanity is contributing much to climate change, or, indeed, that the climate is really changing. 2) Not all scientists agree, however the vast majority do. That's not a lie, that's a fact. People who believe in climate changing don't need to cherry pick data - the data supports our position, as does the general scientific consensus. It truly amazes me that people who trust in science and scientists every day suddenly stop trusting them when they say something inconvenient. Personally, I absolutely loathe people who say 'both sides are as bad as each other', or a variant of such. It's a logical fallacy - www.logicallyfallacious.com There is no middle ground here - either we are contributing to climate change, or we aren't. It's quite hard to not call certain types of people names - primarily, people who believe that 'common sense' trumps knowledge and study. If you don't understand data and basic statistical techniques, you have no right to get involved in a discussion about climate change: you're simply not educated enough to be able to actually contribute. |
Nick G (16709) | ||
| 1439772 | 2017-09-30 18:44:00 | Climate change should be added to religion and politics as subjects that should not be discussed in polite company. Oh wait it is a religion! |
CliveM (6007) | ||
| 1439773 | 2017-09-30 19:18:00 | 1) . 'Deniers' is a pretty good term for describing people who don't believe that humanity is contributing much to climate change, or, indeed, that the climate is really changing . . How about those of us that do believe it but not a s a 100% caused by us scenario? Sure we don't improve the environment, pollution, dirty water, etc but the planet does have warming and cooling periods anyway . Remember there have been (that we know of) 5 extinctions before . No doubt we will experience the 6th, exactly when and exactly how is the matter for debate . If we all change to electric cars and all that it won't help . Perhaps if we dropped our population considerably, that would, in that the pollution would reduce, long term our lifespan as a species on the planet though? Hmmm, way too many other factors for that . |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1439774 | 2017-09-30 22:49:00 | My theory is there are so many carbon atoms in the world. You cant destroy them or make them and at sometime in the worlds history there have been varying amounts sequestered or in the atmosphere. At the moment our contribution is staving off a mini ice age we were entering. So everyone just chillax drink piss, lie in the sun, have sex stop being a worry wort. | prefect (6291) | ||
| 1439775 | 2017-09-30 22:54:00 | Climate change should be added to religion and politics as subjects that should not be discussed in polite company. Oh wait it is a religion! Yes Clive, it is called “The Church of Climatology” where the Worshipers must obey the High Priests, without question, at all times. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | |||||