|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..29..55..81..107..130~131~132~133~134..153..171..189..207..224~225~226 [Next] | ||||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 14, 2016, rockwall wrote: You can make up what you think other people are thinking, but without quoting anyone in the discussion, you're really just shouting to yourself. No one who has read any of the relevant literature denies that changes in solar activity, El Nino activity, volcanism and more are relevant to understanding climate patterns. The question here is to what extent human activity is implicated in the current trends. And the scientific consensus is that human activity is very significant. But (as pointed out repeated to you) humans are by no means the only factor. But I hope you agree that humans are morally responsible for their actions.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Climate hysterics are actually shouting for the arrest of politicians who do not go along the global warming idea. The elite in high places including the Royal family are calling out for a fundamental change in capitalism to tackle the threat of global warming. Green is the new Red and global governance by the elite is what they have been after since before your mother was born a long, long, time ago.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
rockwall Special user 762 Posts |
So, "at least partially of human origin" has now morphed into, "human activity is very significant"?
|
|||||||||
rockwall Special user 762 Posts |
Here's a quote for you Magnus. Took me all of 1 minute to find. If you wanted to even pretend to be honest you would admit that many here have essentially said that "97% of scientists" agree with every scare story perpetrated by you and the rest of the climate hysterics.
danaruns wrote: "Someone is right, and someone is wrong. Period. If the GW folks are right, bad things will happen if we do not listen to them." She then links this belief directly to the "97% of scientists" who she agrees with. "Here's my particular opinion: I'm with the 97% of climate scientists. 97% of the people who know the most about this in the entire world, most of whom are completely unconnected to the United States and its politics." Anyone who has followed this thread for the last 3 years and is being honest knows that her position is common among the true believers and has been repeated over and over. I'm not going to waste my time digging up more quotes for you just cause you want to deny it. |
|||||||||
rockwall Special user 762 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote: I suppose this peer reviewed article is an incompetent blogger also. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art......14002821 "A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported results are inconsistent and biased. The sample is not representative and contains many irrelevant papers. Overall, data quality is low. Cook׳s validation test shows that the data are invalid. Data disclosure is incomplete so that key results cannot be reproduced or tested." |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:...but I hope you agree that humans are morally responsible for their actions. That statement might have some validity if 1) You were a member of some other intelligent language-using species and 2) You were ignorant of the operational distinctions between idealized personal and practical social norms of morality. I'm good with item 1 - as curious about "other". Perspective? A human being... A culture... A better example
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
I am morally responsible for my own actions, not the actions of mankind. Seems to me that you are running pretty close to original sin there John.
One could even make an argument that I should not be financially responsible for the actions of others. Yet many proposed changes will result in that. Do you feel that is moral?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Them that do not go along with the manifesto will be enemies of the state. Some will be more equal than others. There will be nature reserves with keep off the grass signs for you. You the masses, you will be in over crowded cities, lucky to get your ration of Soylent Green.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 14, 2016, rockwall wrote: Illiteracy or dishonesty, rockwall? I said "Many have questioned the significance of this finding--a worthy discussion, IMO."
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 14, 2016, Jonathan Townsend wrote: I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "validity" here. I'm making a normative claim. I'm not sure of any significant moral theory that does not hold that beings that can foresee the likely consequences of their actions are responsible for those action. Quote:
if I don't see 1) as a problem--any creature that shares our reasoning is capable of at least entering the discussion. Quote:
I'm good with item 1 - as curious about "other". Perspective? Surely some part of morality is always caught up with local norms--perhaps even most or all of it. But that doesn't let anyone escape so easily. Why should, say, murderers be granted the defense that they simply don't share our norms? Feel free to question the applicability of individual/corporate/national responsibility for the consequences of emissions. I'm not sure how you could do that, except by the (not very convincing) "I don't share your norms."
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
The horrors of authoritarian socialscientism ... these graphs prove the new policies are for the good of future generations and your smarter self already knows it...so quit the heretical obstinance to the truly greater good and fulfil your role in building the future! What you don't agree? Must others come and inquire into the delusional basis if your misguided, specious and toxic behavior? If you insist the green inquisition may have to interview you.
Remember, the guy in the lab coat says it's for the greater good. Who are you to refuse the greater good of billions...including your neighbors? Folks - you're dancing into an ugly corner between religion, science and big money social policy.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
rockwall Special user 762 Posts |
If, as Magnus states, the only substantive conclusion of Cook's paper was that "97.1% of the published scientific papers supported the position that global climate change is at least partially of human origin", why would anyone give a flying flip. I mean big deal. Like Danny said, I'm surprised it's not 100% who believe that climate change isn't at least partially of human origin. If people realized that's all Cook was able to discover, they wouldn't continually talk about the "97%" ad nauseam. No, there's two reasons people quote this stupid number. 1. They're totally dishonest because they know they can lie about it and people like Magnus will defend them. 2. They're ignorant and are just repeating what people in group 1 have said.
|
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 14, 2016, rockwall wrote: Now would be a great time to do some serious reading. Find out what the issues REALLY are. Discover why the human contribution to global climate change is believed to be a serious problem. Find out what real, genuine climate scientists are studying--where they agree and where the open questions still lie. It'll be work. But it'll be worth it.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Yes but just before we move on to the real issues don’t you think you climate hysterics ought to apologize for being dishonest?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
@Magnus, all,
To date, Danny has not asked for the book. Nor has any other poster on this thread or Café member. Duly noted, JonT
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
When one jabbers on like a mental patient in desperate need of medication with ridiculous esoteric references that have to be deciphered with a code book, yea big shock one tends to get ignored.
Duly noted?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
The measure was: Stated position as relates to having an informed opinion.
Technical: Attempting to build a metric of the little g guv type. Number of posts, posters, citations, arguments from data, requests for data, comment to writer, comment to dialog form...can't really be that big an array of variables to this stuff. Idea: The touchstone of truth in argument is how it compares against available confirmed data in the universe of discourse. The horrific cost of knowlege is its integration into ones character. For simples: Test of sincerity and common knowlege base. If you knew better you wouldn't do worse without reason. If you want to argue by reason you need common ground of accepted notions, enthymemes, to build your argument. For meta: So this is sophistry vs rhetoric?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Now watch how that is ignored.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
0pus Inner circle New Jersey 1739 Posts |
Any fool can self-publish a book nowadays.
What does this book have to recommend it? |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Jonathan Townsend for one thing and therefore then it is 97% certain to be worth reading
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » New Report on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (153 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..29..55..81..107..130~131~132~133~134..153..171..189..207..224~225~226 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |