ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING! , Andrew Bolt , autism , environmental activists , Greta Thunberg

Reply
Old 31st August 2019, 04:01 AM   #601
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
And that poster also doesn't say that global warming is "entirely" man-made.

Perhaps it was someone else?
OK then

I don't think man is "directly responsible for global warming"

Care to prove how man is the cause of global warming?
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000

Last edited by cullennz; 31st August 2019 at 04:09 AM.
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:15 AM   #602
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,995
I refer you to the answer I gave several posts ago:

"A.1 Human activities are estimated to have caused approximately 1.0°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels, with a likely range of 0.8°C to 1.2°C."
Matthew Best is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:22 AM   #603
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
I refer you to the answer I gave several posts ago:

"A.1 Human activities are estimated to have caused approximately 1.0°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels, with a likely range of 0.8°C to 1.2°C."
That is great and I have said man has made an impact. All I have said is the question is how much man has made a difference to what would have happened naturally.

Think a lot probably

But without the big 4-5 countries in terms of emissions change, she is a bit brick wall.
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:30 AM   #604
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,995
Geez, what a waste of time this conversation is.

"Global warming, according to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is being caused by human activity. This conclusion is shared by 97% of actively publishing climate scientists, a 2016 study of peer-reviewed journals found. If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase."

What specifically in that paragraph do you disagree with, and why?
Matthew Best is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:35 AM   #605
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Geez, what a waste of time this conversation is.

"Global warming, according to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is being caused by human activity. This conclusion is shared by 97% of actively publishing climate scientists, a 2016 study of peer-reviewed journals found. If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase."

What specifically in that paragraph do you disagree with, and why?
So you think climate change on the planet is caused by man as well.

Awesome
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:36 AM   #606
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,995
Care to answer the question?
Matthew Best is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:41 AM   #607
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Care to answer the question?
I'm assuming you mean this one

"If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase.""

They wont
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:46 AM   #608
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 88,063
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
The rest of your post doesn't change the fact it is based on computer modelling
And your car was (if it is younger than say 30 years) designed based oncomputer modeling, indeed the chips in your device that lets you post here were all based on computer modeling. Your GPS works on computer modeling. Most technology is based on computer models.

You seem to think computer modeling is inherently a bad thing. Why?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 04:47 AM   #609
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 88,063
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
My apologies to lionking



It was this poster
That quote doesn't say what you were claiming your objection was about. Did you mean to quote another member?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:00 AM   #610
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
And your car was (if it is younger than say 30 years) designed based oncomputer modeling, indeed the chips in your device that lets you post here were all based on computer modeling. Your GPS works on computer modeling. Most technology is based on computer models.

You seem to think computer modeling is inherently a bad thing. Why?
Because the weather isn't predictable

A car is basically a few pistons being hit regularly by a mix of fuel and air, which ignites, driven by a shaft which is controlled by a cam shaft which is moved by a share of inlet and outlet valves which are controlled by your modern day carburetor. Which happens the same way over and over again'



Weather doesn't
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:07 AM   #611
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,624
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
That is great and I have said man has made an impact. All I have said is the question is how much man has made a difference to what would have happened naturally.
Why don't you try reading what he actually posted. It says right there that mankind is behind about a 1 degree Celsius increase in the global average temperature compared to what the heating would be "naturally", which means pre-industrial times.

There's no evidence of any other source than mankind's release of green-house gases that could explain increase this increase in the global average temperature. And that's not because of a lack of an effort to find them.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:08 AM   #612
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,624
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Because the weather isn't predictable
So in New Zealand the weather service just makes stuff up out of thin air? Is that how it works?
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:09 AM   #613
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,995
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
I'm assuming you mean this one

"If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase.""

They wont
The question I was hoping you'd answer was "What specifically in that paragraph do you disagree with, and why?"

The paragraph again:

"Global warming, according to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is being caused by human activity. This conclusion is shared by 97% of actively publishing climate scientists, a 2016 study of peer-reviewed journals found. If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase."

It's like getting blood from a stone.
Matthew Best is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:12 AM   #614
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Why don't you try reading what he actually posted. It says right there that mankind is behind about a 1 degree Celsius increase in the global average temperature compared to what the heating would be "naturally", which means pre-industrial times.

There's no evidence of any other source than mankind's release of green-house gases that could explain increase this increase in the global average temperature. And that's not because of a lack of an effort to find them.

Forgive me for not getting panicky over 1 degree, given the earths changes naturally
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:14 AM   #615
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
So in New Zealand the weather service just makes stuff up out of thin air? Is that how it works?
If they are saying 11 years in the future. Yes
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:18 AM   #616
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,156
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
The question I was hoping you'd answer was "What specifically in that paragraph do you disagree with, and why?"

The paragraph again:

"Global warming, according to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is being caused by human activity. This conclusion is shared by 97% of actively publishing climate scientists, a 2016 study of peer-reviewed journals found. If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase."

It's like getting blood from a stone.
Which bit of me saying man contributes to climate change do you not get?

The fact remains if the top 4-5 don't do anything it is irrelevant
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:37 AM   #617
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,624
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Forgive me for not getting panicky over 1 degree, given the earths changes naturally
Nobody is panicking about global warming. That's a strawman used to try and discredit people who point out the very real consequences of inaction and those who want to do something to prevent, or at least lessen the impact, of said consequenses.

Note here that this is an increase in the average global temperature today, which is not the same as the increase in average temperature at any particular place. The average temperature has increased, and continues to increase, far faster at the poles. Especially throughout the arctic and surrounding areas. With the way things are looking right now the average global temperature is expected to rise far higher than that.

Note also that the average temperature is not the same as the average peak temperature at any specific location.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:40 AM   #618
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 44,579
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Forgive me for not getting panicky over 1 degree, given the earths changes naturally
You are ******* joking.

1C will be catastrophic. Pacific nations will be devastated and the world’s climate will be in tatters. But 3C is on the cards. Look it up.

Do you have children? Have you no regard for the future?

Wake up and do something. Or bury your head in the sands. I know what my money’s on...
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 05:43 AM   #619
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,995
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Which bit of me saying man contributes to climate change do you not get?

The fact remains if the top 4-5 don't do anything it is irrelevant
As I said, like getting blood from a stone.

What bit, if any, of that paragraph do you disagree with?

If you agree with it all, just say so for ****'s sake.
Matthew Best is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 07:47 AM   #620
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,862
Originally Posted by Jungle Jim View Post
I think we should also consider the subject. Some people consider climate change a hoax. Others believe the danger is over stated. Still, others believe there is nothing we can do about it anyway. Someone who brings attention to the issue is an easy target for naysayers.
"You have to take a share of responsibility and make potentially uncomfortable changes to your life" isn't a message most people welcome.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 07:49 AM   #621
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,259
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The way adults like to target children in particular for the most withering and vile of criticism and abuse just because they've done something harmless that's gotten a little publicity has always struck me as deeply disturbing, and all facets of the visceral hate-response that's been directed at Thunberg is no exception.
Envy is a terrible thing. Also people actually "doing something" are often a target of the lazy and apathetic masses as it damages their sense of self-worth.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 07:53 AM   #622
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,259
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
So I am guessing now she has sailed to the US, with a team of sailors, The sailing team will fly home, she will fly round the US to get to all the conferences and then fly home.

Nice virtue signalling
I see you're back to your usual drivel spouting.


Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
I don't have any evidence

Which is why I said "I guess". It is called presuming.
Or, and this might be a bit revolutionary for you, you could say nothing until you learn the actual facts.

Quote:
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 07:58 AM   #623
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,037
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
If they are saying 11 years in the future. Yes
And a confusion of the difference between climate and weather.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 07:59 AM   #624
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,259
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Interesting but hardly surprising. Belittling your opponent, for whatever reason, is a common tactic of those who have no rational argument.
Plus AGW denialism is very trendy amongst the right-wing atm, who are also frequently misogynistic.
The more effective GT is at mobilising opinion in favour of anti-AGW measures, the more vehement the attacks will become
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 07:59 AM   #625
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,037
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
I'm assuming you mean this one

"If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase.""

They wont
Care to show your work?
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 08:01 AM   #626
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,259
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
How much man has to do with how quickly it is happening to me is the actual topic.

I have no idea, but imagine we are contibuting quite a bit to the speed.

I think "carbon credits" and Carbon exchange schemes are utter bollocks as all it does is charge people more so companies spewing emissions can still spew the same emissions, but just get kind of a tax refund.
Perhaps, instead of remaining voluntarily ignorant, you should look at the science of AGW? You know, educate yourself before pontificating...
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 09:46 AM   #627
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,506
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
The rest of your post doesn't change the fact it is based on computer modelling
What else apart from computer modelling are you going to use?

I do lots of virtual experiments of complex device physics in computer models before I decide on what I'm going to do in actual silicon.

Computer models are the only way of getting quantitative forecasts. If you want qualitative forecasts, or observations, then you have to fall back on the fact that measured atmospheric CO2 levels have increased by almost a third since 1960 and that we know that will trap more heat in the atmosphere, specifically in the region where the CO2 is. This is what we observe, and it is especially convincing when we also see that the upper atmosphere is cooling, which is consistent with more heat being trapped in the lower atmosphere.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 06:13 PM   #628
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
You guys are getting the run around by a denialist troll. Disengage and ignore.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 06:55 PM   #629
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,116
Andrew Bolt continues his slagging of an “afflicted” child.
(And he calls others cowards)

COWARDS, HIDING BEHIND GRETA THUNBERG'S CHILD ARMY

Quote:
Greta Thunberg has landed in the United States, to be greeted by two more members of her child army. There's a reason journalists and activists are hiding behind these children. They're cowards. They count on adults not wanting to contradict those so young - and afflicted - even though Thunberg's cult is pushing nonsense. My editorial from The Bolt Report.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 08:26 PM   #630
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,867
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The above is a fairly exemplary QED of my prior point. The poster isn't simply saying they think Thunberg is wrong about climate change; they also are compelled to describe her as "unattractive", a "high school dropout", having "Aspergers and who knows what else", a "political shill", even invoking her nationality as part of a list of qualities the poster implies are discrediting or make her unworthy of attention. This person clearly has as much a problem with Thunberg personally as they do with Thunberg's message; that's why "haters" is a valid moniker.
Please tell us which of those descriptors I used are not true. And had you actually paid attention you would understand I'm looking for an argument why I SHOULD listen to her. I presented those as reasons why I wouldn't. And actually, her being only 16 is reason enough.

Maybe funniest of all, you childishly pretend I'm not rightfully allowed to disagree with the message or the messenger since it's <gasp> in opposition to your own opinion. Hater? Really? Grow up!

Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Geez, what a waste of time this conversation is.

"Global warming, according to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is being caused by human activity. This conclusion is shared by 97% of actively publishing climate scientists, a 2016 study of peer-reviewed journals found. If carbon emissions are not curbed, and global temperatures continue to rise, researchers expect the risks of climate change to increase."

What specifically in that paragraph do you disagree with, and why?
The list of things to "disagree with" about the IPCC and its report is long. Obviously you believe everything it says. Why? Because "it's science, man". You really think "a consensus of 97% of climate scientists" have any serious ability to foretell the future of the earth 30-50-75 years down the road using only a human engineered prognostication technology that relies on so many assumptions and variables that here in the real world "pure fantasy" comes far closer to describing its capabilities than does "truth machine"? How could it be possible to barely have the ability to forecast next week's weather (yes we know climate isn't weather blah blah; you're missing the point if that's your first thought [and missing a second one if you pretend weather and climate aren't inextricably mixed up]), yet somehow "a consensus of 97% of climate scientists" KNOWS EXACTLY what's going to happen with the climate (and thus the weather) in the year 2100? Of course they don't.

Do they claim they can predict the climate in the year 2500? Why not?

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
And your car was (if it is younger than say 30 years) designed based oncomputer modeling, indeed the chips in your device that lets you post here were all based on computer modeling. Your GPS works on computer modeling. Most technology is based on computer models.

You seem to think computer modeling is inherently a bad thing. Why?
It's not an inherently bad thing, but using it as a total and complete substitute for material reality (like "climate science" is doing) while also thinking nothing could be wrong with that idea is literally the biggest mistake you could make with it. When you design a chip or a car with a modeling program, that chip or car actually gets made in 3 dimensions and all the flaws in the virtual 3d modeling process (and there are typically many) become apparent as its material counterpart also takes form/use in the real world. Not true at all with the climate models.

How EXACTLY does a model based on human predicted conditions 50 years from now "verify" that anything it's saying as a conclusion is actually true? Does the modeling program itself "verify" itself based on its own human programmed assumptions and variables about what "playing god" would be like in 50 years? Is there a god? Or, since "a consensus of 97% of climate scientists" agree then it becomes cosmically true (regardless of its non-existence and eventual birth still a half century away)? I mean, how could "a consensus of 97% of climate scientists" EVER be wrong, right?

Here's a clue. In the last week they've yet to get even a single thing about Hurricane Dorian's behavior right and (because she's 'right there') they update their "model" probably every 2 minutes. They can literally physically measure any/every single "data point" they need anytime and yet they've been continually wrong wrong wrong since the very beginning. How is that possible if we're so ******* great at predicting the climate's 100 year future so precisely with very similar virtual modeling programs using no real world data at all? Maybe they need to stop measuring the real thing completely and only rely on a speculative model? I mean, right?

Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Forgive me for not getting panicky over 1 degree, given the earths changes naturally
Ask these rocket scientists what the IDEAL average temperature is supposed to be. If they foolishly answer with a number then you know they're full of it because an ideal average temperature has never been determined (nor could it have been). Which itself is almost proof enough the entire "crisis" is made up.

Karl: "We have to change that!"
Max: "Change what? To what?"
Karl: "Our freedom to communism."
Max: "Why?"
Karl: "Because the average temperature went up a degree."
Max: "One degree? What's the average temperature supposed to be?"
Karl: "Nobody knows! That's why communism! The lady said."
Max: "Huh?"
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 10:03 PM   #631
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by EHocking View Post
Andrew Bolt continues his slagging of an “afflicted” child.
(And he calls others cowards)

COWARDS, HIDING BEHIND GRETA THUNBERG'S CHILD ARMY



YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Shaming con artists like Andrew Bolt doesn't work. They have no shame.

They make money pushing this crap to their target audience, but contrary to conventional wisdom, the target audience isn't necessarily idiot deniers, although they are an important middle man. The main target for these eruptions of excrement is the rest of us, hoping for us to get angry, thus furthering the conflict. The end game for these sub-humans is to allow the outrage of normal people galvanize the quasi-humans who like Bolt's propaganda, in order to increase revenue and votes for other sub-humans.

The best way to deal with **** like this is to ignore the message and focus on how to remove the ideological brethren of the author from any form of power, and keep them there - suppressed and bound.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2019, 11:38 PM   #632
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,995
Greta responds:

Quote:
When haters go after your looks and differences, it means they have nowhere left to go. And then you know you’re winning!
I have Asperger’s syndrome and that means I’m sometimes a bit different from the norm. And - given the right circumstances - being different is a superpower.

I'm not public about my diagnosis to "hide" behind it, but because I know many ignorant people still see it as an "illness", or something negative. And believe me, my diagnosis has limited me before.
Before I started school striking I had no energy, no friends and I didn’t speak to anyone. I just sat alone at home, with an eating disorder.
All of that is gone now, since I have found a meaning, in a world that sometimes seems meaningless to so many people.
Matthew Best is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 01:21 AM   #633
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 88,063
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Because the weather isn't predictable



A car is basically a few pistons being hit regularly by a mix of fuel and air, which ignites, driven by a shaft which is controlled by a cam shaft which is moved by a share of inlet and outlet valves which are controlled by your modern day carburetor. Which happens the same way over and over again'







Weather doesn't
We aren't discussing the weather, we are discussing the climate.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 03:28 AM   #634
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,862
Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
I'm looking for an argument why I SHOULD listen to her. I presented those as reasons why I wouldn't. And actually, her being only 16 is reason enough.
Emily Rosa was 15, the Therapeutic Touch Practitioners were adults.

Just sayin.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 09:01 AM   #635
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,506
Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The above is a fairly exemplary QED of my prior point. The poster isn't simply saying they think Thunberg is wrong about climate change; they also are compelled to describe her as "unattractive", a "high school dropout", having "Aspergers and who knows what else", a "political shill", even invoking her nationality as part of a list of qualities the poster implies are discrediting or make her unworthy of attention. This person clearly has as much a problem with Thunberg personally as they do with Thunberg's message; that's why "haters" is a valid moniker.
Please tell us which of those descriptors I used are not true. And had you actually paid attention you would understand I'm looking for an argument why I SHOULD listen to her. I presented those as reasons why I wouldn't. And actually, her being only 16 is reason enough.

Maybe funniest of all, you childishly pretend I'm not rightfully allowed to disagree with the message or the messenger since it's <gasp> in opposition to your own opinion. Hater? Really? Grow up!


<snip>
Well, the highlighted is a classic case of poisoning the well.

Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Funny how the more political the subject, the less skeptical this <cough> skeptics board becomes. Could somebody please present a rational argument (valid reason?) as to why anyone should listen to what a 16 year old Swedish high school dropout with Asperger's (and who knows what else, FAS perhaps) has to say on both a highly controversial political subject and the thoroughly imprecise "science" related to it that she (like the rest of humanity) knows essentially nothing about?

Don't forget, she's the only human being who's ever (claimed to have) seen those invisible, teeny-tiny CO2 molecules with the naked eye. Which according to her is a pollutant. She "sees how it flows out of chimneys and turns the atmosphere into a rubbish tip." Yet CO2 has never been designated a pollutant by anyone or anything intelligent anywhere. Ever! In fact the opposite is true, (from 6th grade science) carbon is the basic building block of life and so essential to it (where do you think all that carbon in the carbon cycle comes from?) that CO2's present day minor concentration in the atmosphere (400 PPM) going below 150 PPM would inevitably end all life on earth.

No I'm not trying to convince a skeptics board to be skeptical, that would be stupidity on my part. I'm after just one valid reason why I should be listening in earnest to a young unattractive political shill who would otherwise have a hard time convincing anyone she's even female. I mean, if the general attitude in society is we're to "listen to the scientists" (a prevailing if not misguided sentiment), you can't arbitrarily add to that "and drop-out resource classes teenagers who really like attention and sailing on ships" and still claim any seriousness.

Would Kim Kardashian be a better or worse Carbon Is Bad™ spokesmodel than Greta Thunberg? Why?
As for the rest. It's a good job her message is to listen to the experts rather than her, then.

ETA: And can you please explain how the physical attractiveness or otherwise of a person is in any way relevant?
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending

Last edited by jimbob; 1st September 2019 at 09:04 AM.
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 09:05 AM   #636
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,506
Carbon dioxide is a pollutant. It is generally not a poison at the levels we are talking about, but it still is a pollutant. Pretending otherwise, and making utterly irrelevant comments about its necessity is either missing the point or a deliberate attempt to mislead.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 09:14 AM   #637
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,195
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
You are ******* joking.

1C will be catastrophic. Pacific nations will be devastated and the world’s climate will be in tatters. But 3C is on the cards. Look it up.

Do you have children? Have you no regard for the future?

Wake up and do something. Or bury your head in the sands. I know what my money’s on...
Panicking is a terrible strategy. Police and firemen are trained to not panic in an emergency situation.

Climate change does happen naturally. There was an ice age circa 18K - 10K years ago. In the Bronze Age, Scandinavians and North Europe enjoyed mediterranean temperatures.

Of course, lots needs to be done, such as alternatives to landfill, with its subsequent emissions of methane, micro plastics and parabens in shampoos, soaps and cosmetics needs to be banned all together. Awareness needs to be raised about plastics polluing our oceans and seas.

But panic? I don't think so.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 09:22 AM   #638
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,195
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
I wonder if it's not largely the result of jealousy and that her appearance clashes with the typical photogenic activists that are usually made into figureheads. These people probably think along the lines of "How did this little girl become so famous?! She's a freak! She's not good looking and hasn't accomplished anything at all! What's her deal?! Who does she think she is?".

Spiteful responses become a natural response in order to call her out for acting above her station and that she should know her place. At least that's what I imagine is making so many people respond like toxic juvenile bullies.
I disagree with you. Greta is perfectly pretty, photogenic and good-looking. So she doesn't wear false eyelashes or pose with that ridiculous 'trout pout' women think men find attractive.

So she should bleach her hair, get a perm, slap loads of makeup on, wear a super-bra and high heels and she'll become 'good looking' in your eyes.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 09:30 AM   #639
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,195
Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Funny how the more political the subject, the less skeptical this <cough> skeptics board becomes. Could somebody please present a rational argument (valid reason?) as to why anyone should listen to what a 16 year old Swedish high school dropout with Asperger's (and who knows what else, FAS perhaps) has to say on both a highly controversial political subject and the thoroughly imprecise "science" related to it that she (like the rest of humanity) knows essentially nothing about?

Don't forget, she's the only human being who's ever (claimed to have) seen those invisible, teeny-tiny CO2 molecules with the naked eye. Which according to her is a pollutant. She "sees how it flows out of chimneys and turns the atmosphere into a rubbish tip." Yet CO2 has never been designated a pollutant by anyone or anything intelligent anywhere. Ever! In fact the opposite is true, (from 6th grade science) carbon is the basic building block of life and so essential to it (where do you think all that carbon in the carbon cycle comes from?) that CO2's present day minor concentration in the atmosphere (400 PPM) going below 150 PPM would inevitably end all life on earth.

No I'm not trying to convince a skeptics board to be skeptical, that would be stupidity on my part. I'm after just one valid reason why I should be listening in earnest to a young unattractive political shill who would otherwise have a hard time convincing anyone she's even female. I mean, if the general attitude in society is we're to "listen to the scientists" (a prevailing if not misguided sentiment), you can't arbitrarily add to that "and drop-out resource classes teenagers who really like attention and sailing on ships" and still claim any seriousness.

Would Kim Kardashian be a better or worse Carbon Is Bad™ spokesmodel than Greta Thunberg? Why?
Perhaps if you could post a picture of yourself on here we could then judge whether your level of attractiveness is sufficient for us to take you seriously.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2019, 09:32 AM   #640
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,195
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The above is a fairly exemplary QED of my prior point. The poster isn't simply saying they think Thunberg is wrong about climate change; they also are compelled to describe her as "unattractive", a "high school dropout", having "Aspergers and who knows what else", a "political shill", even invoking her nationality as part of a list of qualities the poster implies are discrediting or make her unworthy of attention. This person clearly has as much a problem with Thunberg personally as they do with Thunberg's message; that's why "haters" is a valid moniker.
To be fair, being Swedish is a bit much ...<g d rvvvvvvvf>
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

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 09:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.