General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
What offends me is your arrogance and absolute certainty in your dogma. I'll bet you're some form of christian or muslim, and as dogmatic there as you are in the rest of your life.
Wrong again!

I'm confident because I know the facts and understand them well enough to support the case. I also know that nearly 100% of other people who understand this issue also believe that this understanding is correct. It's not "faith," it's a well supported theory.
Quote:
As for you and your throwing around "AGW" like everyone should know it to their bones: a 100-year-old theory is still just that: a theory. It's not "incontrovertible"--if it were, it would be LAW, carved into stone, dogma for which to question I would be put to DEATH!!

All theory is malleable. It's supposed to be.
It doesn't work that way. Theories do not progress into laws. Theory is the highest level of certainty you can get. A law is just a mathematical formula describing a phenomena.

The AGW has adapted over the years to new information, will likely continue to do so. Happens that the people who understand it well have a great deal of confidence that it's correct. That's the highest level it can go.
Quote:
And it's arrogants like you that mess it up for everyone else, because you think you know more than everyone else. You seem to delight in calling me "ignorant" and "stupid", yet you missed my entire point utterly, you're so tight-focused on your own brilliance, you fail to see the bigger pictures--and that those pictures aren't pictures, they're movies, and the never stop changing.

Again your arrogance: instead of addressing the fact that human climate data is a VERY small sample, truly too small to even come close to being a molecule in the bucket, much less a drop, you choose to post a link to a environazi propaganda site that gives you step-by-step instructions on how to counter people like me.

Wow. Not only are you arrogant, you cannot even formulate an independent thought, or carry on a discussion with someone who doesn't agree without resorting to a play book. And I'll bet you have your sex moves all mapped out on a spreadsheet.
My point with referencing that website is that you're just using common tropes, things which have been fed to you by the efforts of the group from the OP. You're the one following the playbook bro.

I'm calling you ignorant because it's pretty obvious that you really don't know anything about this, but really, why would you? The problem is that you think A) everyone else is as ignorant as you are B) that your opinion is of equal importance to people with a greater understanding.

As far as the ignorance/snapshot issue goes, why is it so inconceivable to you that we might understand climate without having a perfect direct observation record going back to infinity? We understand the behavior of electrons in atoms. We can smash atoms into their smallest pieces. We can build a spacecraft that can leave the solar system. But...it's just unimaginable to you (without actually knowing the data available or the level of understanding of the physical principles) that we could understand the climate?

Says more about you than about science, really. I like to think that everything is understandable, eventually.

Quote:
I suppose, if I were to shit on your lawn every time I needed to, that COULD be called "anthropomorphic global warming" in action (), mainly because of water contamination and the spread of disease (yes, I'm stretching here, bear with me). And that's a perfect example of how humans affect the environment--but, then again, other animals do it to: dogs, cats, rats, mice, roaches, ants, plankton, bacteria, even virii, ad infinitum. Trees and plants do it to.

We live here. We are a product of the processes of this plant and of physics and nature. EVERYTHING we produce, every chemical we make, every object we create, every person we make, all have the same chemicals, compounds, and molecules that were here on this planet the the last 4 billion years. Everything that's "released" has been here that long, too. All that carbon was created by stellar formation processes (unless you're a creationist, then there's no hope for you, and I call for a and ban), as well as every other fucking element on the periodic table (and a few we have no clue about yet), and has been a part of global processes for all this time. Because we're using it to advance our "civilizations" (), it's being put to good use., still.

And, until we can advance our technology, it ain't gonna change soon. But the length of time we've used it is too small to have a huge impact upon a closed system as big as this planet. Nuclear waste: oh, fuck yes, but the impact of that is more upon us, and to a lesser event other forms of life, it would eventually cool off, and eventually the planet balance out again. Same goes for toxic waste: just takes less time to break it down to constituent components, and remove the toxicity.

And the planet will recover. Burn us off the planet (much like a similar event a few hundred million years ago that gave us our coal and diamond mines), and life will recover, and quite well. At best, we're the blister on Terra's dick.

And despite critters that were similar to humans stretching back up to 4 million years, and actual humans about 50k, in varying numbers, the planet hasn't been harmed by any of them. Of course, a majority of our history was lived in relative harmony with the environment--and any time that balance went the wrong way, nature had a great way of bringing back into balance (famine, pestilence, and disease). Civilization collapses, balance resumes, and we start digging in the muck and flinging our poo at each other again.

So here we are. Still figuring it out. If we're lucky, well get it before the planet scrapes us off and starts over.
Got some links for that too (well, after I snipped some crazy out).'
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Can-...al-warming.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/clim...arm-period.htm

I don't know about you, but I don't really want to live through a period of geological history featuring mass extinctions. It's unlikely that humans would get wiped out, but the adaptation process would be extremely painful. That's something we ought to try to avoid.

Nobody is going to "destroy the planet," that's hyperbole. It's hardly arrogance to accept that burning tens of millions of years of stored hydrocarbons might be influencing the climate of the Earth. It would be stranger if it wasn't having an effect, really. We're on pace to double the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. We know that it's humans doing this, it's not a natural thing.

Quote:
Outside that: learn to park your arrogance. Have some humility in the face of a problem far larger than the mere mortal minds of humanity.
There's that ignorance worship again. Who gets to decide which topics are just too damn complex for humanity's tiny brains, you?
Old 02-18-2013, 10:03 AM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#46  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
And it's arrogants like you that mess it up for everyone else, because you think you know more than everyone else. You seem to delight in calling me "ignorant" and "stupid", yet you missed my entire point utterly, you're so tight-focused on your own brilliance, you fail to see the bigger pictures--and that those pictures aren't pictures, they're movies, and the never stop changing.

He does know more than most of the rest of us - he's got a PhD. Calling him out on his turf when you've got at most a BS in ME with all of chem 101 from 50 years ago under your belt is foolhardy.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 10:17 AM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#47  

SamFarber
 
SamFarber's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
He does know more than most of the rest of us - he's got a PhD. Calling him out on his turf when you've got at most a BS in ME with all of chem 101 from 50 years ago under your belt is foolhardy.

PhD just means swallowing dogma. Many of them are imbeciles.
Old 02-18-2013, 12:13 PM SamFarber is offline  
Reply With Quote
#48  

SamFarber
 
SamFarber's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post
I know you're not really concerned about "evidence" or anything, but this stuff is demonstrable historical fact.

I've already shown it is impossible for it to be "historical."

Quote:
The theory of AGW has been around for literally 100+ years, and there was no money involved in it up until very recently.
Yeah, and a 100 years ago they weren't able to CONTROL PEOPLE like they are doing now using this as an excuse - prime example being "Smart Grid."

Did they have smart meters 100 years ago? No.

What do you think they would have done to some control freak wanting to control how much water your toilet and shower uses back then?

Quote:
No motive to be a scam, just scientists doing science.
Oh, what were the controls?

Quote:
Only very recently did it become politicized, and there's direct evidence of an astroturf denial movement.
It became political when some religious freaks started trying to control PEOPLE using the theory. Do you think anyone would care if these people left other people ALONE?

It would be like communism - there weren't anti-communists when people just theorized about it. It was a theory for a long time, too. Then you have the Bolsheviks killing people by the millions USING THE THEORY.

Now THAT is a good analogy!

Quote:
So again, either you can believe that there's a massive worldwide conspiracy of scientists going back 100 years, or you can believe that a small group of rich people is opposed to the idea and is trying to discredit it. Occam's Razor works here.

I don't really get into the policy side of things. The US is still in the "attack the science" stage, so that's what I'm concerned about.
There is no "science" because there is no controlled experimentation going on. You can have a theory all you like - but when you call it "science" and act like it is proven you debase science itself.
Old 02-18-2013, 12:21 PM SamFarber is offline  
Reply With Quote
#49  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamFarber View Post
PhD just means swallowing dogma. Many of them are imbeciles.

No, a PhD means that he wrote and defended a thesis based on his own original research, something you've never done and will never do.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 12:25 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#50  

SamFarber
 
SamFarber's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
No, a PhD means that he wrote and defended a thesis based on his own original research, something you've never done and will never do.

Yeah, but you seek out other who believe the same things you do for your "panel." And Acadmedia creates little, if anything. They all believe this theory because they get funding for it - there is no money in denying it. But most importantly, they get prestige for supporting it. It means they "CARE." I can't believe any mature mind can't see through this charade.

Academia has become a caricature of itself now - with experiments putting shrimp on a treadmill and saying they have shown plants need light to grow.
Old 02-18-2013, 12:33 PM SamFarber is offline  
Reply With Quote
#51  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamFarber View Post
Yeah, but you seek out other who believe the same things you do for your "panel." And Acadmedia creates little, if anything. They all believe this theory because they get funding for it - there is no money in denying it. But most importantly, they get prestige for supporting it. It means they "CARE." I can't believe any mature mind can't see through this charade.

Academia has become a caricature of itself now - with experiments putting shrimp on a treadmill and saying they have shown plants need light to grow.

__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 02:40 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#52  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post

Says the man with modifications on his car dumping gobs of exhaust into the atmosphere.
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 02-18-2013, 02:41 PM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#53  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rancidpunk666 View Post
Says the man with modifications on his car dumping gobs of exhaust into the atmosphere.

On a tons per year basis, I do a crapload better than you do, fatty. The modified Z hasn't run in 2 years, and even when it did, it only saw 1500-2000 miles in a typical year.

I do my commuting on a bicycle.

And seriously, are you going to glorify SamRacist's "smart people are all conformists trying to keep the truth down, MAAAAN" viewpoint?
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 02:45 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#54  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Ya... I share a car in the winter and take the 650 from spring til first snow.

Pretty sure a 650 puts of less emissions than your sweaty ass
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 02-18-2013, 02:48 PM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#55  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rancidpunk666 View Post
Pretty sure a 650 puts of less emissions than your sweaty ass

Pretty sure that 650 has about the performance of a 250 and the emissions of a 1300 with you on top of it, lardo.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 02:52 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#56  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
Pretty sure that 650 has about the performance of a 250 and the emissions of a 1300 with you on top of it, lardo.

Probably not.

Plus your wife is fat too
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 02-18-2013, 02:53 PM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#57  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rancidpunk666 View Post
Plus your wife is fat too

Only in your demented dreams, tubbo.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 02:56 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#58  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehannum View Post
Only in your demented dreams, tubbo.

I'm not the only one to call you out on your cow wife
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 02-18-2013, 02:58 PM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#59  

Jehannum
 
Jehannum's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rancidpunk666 View Post
I'm not the only one to call you out on your cow wife

Actually, you really are the only one to ever call my wife out.

Seeing as she's 5'4" with a BMI of ~21, you're not only dead wrong, you're kind of silly, calling names from up there with your BMI of 35.
__________________
Your powers are useless! I'm wearing my tin foil underwear!

1992 300ZX: Not stock, 433 RWHP
1971 240Z: Toyota front brakes, 123 RWHP
1967 Pontiac GTO: not stock.
Old 02-18-2013, 03:00 PM Jehannum is offline  
Reply With Quote
#60  

Reply


Thread Tools

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

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:20 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.