Global Warming Sucks

[Subtle]

Earlier in this thread there was some confusion about the term "ad hominem"

Someone provided the literal Latin translation as " to the man", and this could be taken a little further, with "to the personality, character, defects, or even origin of the person".

For example, some enthusiast raves about the performance increase provided by his newly acquired Fart Can.

Someone with more experience, or a background in physics can on some authority point out that a pipe at the end of an exhaust system with 2 inches in and 5 inches out some 8 inches downstream won't enhance performance.

The true believer gulps and says "Asshole", or in commenting upon the rationalist's origins, adds "SOB".

Another term is "reductio ad absurdum", which translates as stretching your opponents arguement to absurdity.

For example, the intense part of the movement that claims our existance is "causing" 12,000 years of global warming also claims that a 6 billion population is unhealthy for the planet.

O K-- how many would be "healthy"? In the mid 1700s the estimated population number is some 700 million, using the political movement's reasoning the planet was "healthy" then.

O K--Mr./ Mrs./Ms. concerned citizen " How do you propose to reduce the population to at least a billion?"

[vrg3]

There's a difference between citing facts that make a source authoritative and name-calling.

Tell me, can you successfully discredit the ricer's claim by calling that person a ricer?

[Subtle]

Offensive term "Ricer" has been removed.

[evolutionmovement]

The "healthy population" is ever more reliant on its technology to keep it healthy, however many parts of the world are building a house of cards with their lack of controls.

How to reduce the population? It will all be in my website. Most people won't like it, but either we do something or nature will and nature doesn't discriminate. I'd rather weed out the weak and stupid with incentives that almost everyone can relate to - money/security and education. Were it not for uneducated immigrants our population would be in decline, our birth rates decreasing as they are in less immigration-friendly Europe and Japan. The age burden is going to hurt, but then we can always cut off the support in an economic emergency (which I think is inevitable).

Let me stress that my plan is in no way reminiscent of the Final Solution policy of a certain German socialist worker's movement and is definitely not racially/gender discriminatory (though some quaint cultural traditions will be eliminated - like female circumcision or any fundamentalist religious law). It is at its core a non-violent solution. But of course, it first has to be implemented and there's only one way to implement a new plan on a large population - force.

So here's to nature, the only real equalizer. She's wiped out highly evolved successful species and civilizations before. We are, perhaps, just the only ones that are aware of our mortality. What do I care? I don't have kids, significant other, or the desire to live past 50 TOPS depending on whether I can finish my damn books and a car or two, but I keep coming up with new ideas and that has been pushing my acceptable date of departure up. I guess I've always felt it was important to leave a mark in spacetime and something that is remembered in the perceived future of our temporary existence. I would think it a character flaw were it not for the fact that this crap flows through me for some reason.

[Subtle]

Bloomberg wire:

Typically the temp for some large Siberian cities ranges between -15 C to -39 C in January.

Weather warning of a drop to -55 C, or 67 below.

Already in semi-tropical Georgia it is -35 C , and a big lake has frozen over for the first time in 50 years.

[SubaruNation]

all i can say right now is

WHOA

[vrg3]

Yes, unusual cold spells is one of the effects of global warming according to the generally accepted understanding.

[evolutionmovement]

It follows reason that as you change the amount of heat, you change the patterns of air currents whose movements are partly initiated by temperature differentials.

Global Climate Change is a better general term for most people. Global Warming isn't incorrect, but a casual familiarity leads to wrong assumptions and people aren't usually interested in learning things on their own. They just want sound bites and headlines.

[SubaruNation]

i know all about that

[Subtle]

The term primitive syllogism describes a common blunder in logic, and this is the ability to conclude that because two things occur at the same time--they are causally related.

The traditional and most ludicrous example has been the observation that because roosters crow as the sun comes up they are causing the sun to rise.

The new and really big one is that modern culture now causes global warming.

There is an old saying in physics that if you keep your data base short rnough it will fit your theory, and man-caused global warming is a prime example. This theory cannot explain that temps increased from around 500 AD until around 1300 AD when the climate was as warm as it recent, and the population was much smaller.

[vrg3]

No authoritative source claims to explain how the planet's climate works.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[evolutionmovement]

Carl Sagan.

I still maintain that, hurtling towards a wall and arguing over whether the Audi is accelerating on its own or if it's your foot on the pedal that's causing it is pointless. I'd say take your foot off the gas and maybe hit the wall slower and if not, buckle up and at least be ready.

We're still polluting and creating an unsustainable wreck of our environment through poor fishing, farming, and live stock practices. More than a few mysterious vanishings of great ancient civilizations can be postulated to be the result of the very same thing. My dislike of humanity stems from their inability to learn a friggin lesson. We're spending vast sums of money rebuilding New Orleans. The radical changes we could make in agriculture instead would be far more intelligent, but then humans collectively display little of that and only a few, usually of narrow-band intelligence, advance society as a whole. The large number of sheep and stupid people in relation to the innovators and people who aren't afraid of risk is our Sisyphus' stone.

[Subtle]

No authoritative source claims to explain how the planet's climate works.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Check out ---- www.friendsofscience.org

With a review of this site anyone would want to work on a degree in Geophysics.

This is a volunteer effort and privately funded--I've been a supporter since late 2002.

[SubaruNation]

cool!

and evolution,

i read in a national geographic review of new Orleans (WAY before it happened) that what did happen could happen very easily.

and did, kinda funny how some people think

[vrg3]

Friends of Science looks kinda sketchy to me, Subtle... They start off by stating their opinion and that they don't do any research. Doesn't that sound like they're just collecting a repository of research that seems to support their opinion?

[Subtle]

Vikash

It is lengthy, but read the "Science Background" section.

It reviews the literature up to the start of what I called in a 2002 article "Political Science".

Then two of the members (McIntyre and McKitrick) demonstrated the glaring flaws in Michael Mann's "Hockey Stick" graph of global temperature history.

Dr. Mann is listed as a climatologist but his chart virtually erased the Medieval Warming when the population of Northen Europe expanded.

The first phase of cooling in the early 1300s was sudden and initiated by an increase of volcanic activity in Iceland. As I recall, cold and wet (acid from the volcanoes) caused a couple of years of crop failures (~1315-1318) with a 10% die off.

Further cooling was largely due to an unusual reduction of energy from the sun, which with poorer crops and harvests at the higher elevations becoming impossible, weakened the health of the population such that it was more vulnerable than otherwise when the Plague came along in 1347, and beyond. Fatalities ranged from 1/3 to 1/2 the population.

Cooling continues down to a bitter low in 1685 when the Thames above London froze solid enough such that coaches with 4 horses could be supported.

Mann. for political expediency, made this vanish, and so that it has not been missed --two members of this forum did the wotk.

Vikash --what I have been trying to point out is that the science was well understood before it became a political football.

The Vatican trashed Galileo in the political distemper of the early 1600s , and after centuries eventually agreed that Rome was not the center of the solar system.

Recently, after beginning with a review of the literature last spring, announced that the theory of anthropogenic warming was basically flawed.

The Vatican got on the correct side of science this time--although such conclusions are politically incorrect.

[Manarius]

Frankly, the argument of Global Climate Change is irrelevant. The fact is, we have the technology, the money, and the rationality to make less of an impact than we do now. Why in the world would one argue to NOT do that? It makes no sense. If we have the choice to do something better, why would you FIGHT AGAINST it?

I don't care if global warming is true or not. We should be cutting carbon emissions and being more friendly to the environment regardless.

[evolutionmovement]

I disagree with his assertions on the climate being a large factor in the vulnerability of the population against plague. There were many factors; overpopulation, lack of food diversity, and horrible hygiene (encouraged by the Vatican as bathing and such was the domain of the infidels) and sanitary conditions, as well as some cultural traditions and a misunderstanding of the root cause among them. Maybe that's not the point, but causality, I thought, was an argument against the existence of human-caused global warming, which I still maintain is more appropriately called climate change.

I find it telling that for a short period after the plague had first wiped out millions that many people enjoyed a peaceful life with greater rights and decent varied food. But then the rich people introduced the feudal system to reassert their power and it all went to shit again. And the cycle continues anew today.

[Subtle]

The climate deteriorated so significantly that the population was declining before the arrival of the Black Death.

When mortality rates are greater than the birth rate you can be sure it is a sign of poor health.

The European colony in Greenland died off completely.

All of this stuff was well published before the essentially complete science of climate change was corrupted for political gain.

[vrg3]

Subtle - I don't have the time at the moment to review the material on that site, so I can't give my thoughts on it yet, but when I do take a look it will be hard to take it seriously given the lack of a scientific approach. Beginning with a particular ideology is simply not the way to perform a study that can be considered objective. Does that make any sense?

[Subtle]

You might review it.

Mann's work is discredited.

The logic about man-caused warming is a common blunder.(my point)

The main "greenhouse" gas is water vapor.

There is very little correlation between carbon and climate change. If anything, temp leads carbon.

Most of the millions of years of climate change has been due to inluences off the planet. The output from the sun varies and the amount of energy received at the earth's surface varies due to the shape of the ellipse around the sun as well as to the tilt of the earth's axis relative to the sun.

Authoritarians can no longer 'sell" socialist central planning as a way of diminishing freedom and imposing control.

A new superstition was needed.

Then it goes full circle--the most authoritarian countries like eastern Europe and China have had the worst assault on the environment.

Anymore posts and I will be repeating myself.

[evolutionmovement]

I don't understand how global warming is an authoritarian conspiracy. I don't think there's anything remotely positive in their methods of control, alleged lies or not. And preventing Global Warming would be a positive thing if it is true and caused by man. But in fact it took years for Global Warming to be accepted by the present US admin and it seems to be they've only jumped on it out of regard to prevailing public opinion. Or is it that maybe they finally accepted it as they were close to getting thrown out of the trilateral commission for not acquiescing to the plan for the NWO?

[Subtle]

I have been writing that warming has been a natural event and the response has been "You must do as I say.!", otherwise it is extremely unhealthy to the planet.

In Biblical times one form of control was established through the concept of Original Sin.

Nowadays, how far could you get in starting a new religion based upon sexual morality?

Under the religion of man-caused global warming, just living is a sin.

[smh0101]

I agree...

Environmentalism has become nothing more than a fad religion.

There is a god, Mother Earth.

There are worshipers, tree huggers.

And there is a moral: Save the planet; kill yourselves.

I rest-eth my case-eth.

lol

And as with all fad religions, it is based upon fear.

We must protect our "god" and sacrifice ourselves.

And if you do not follow our ways you are drinking your own poisoned kool-aid. By "polluting".

And as with all fad religions, the goal is control.

[smh0101]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/ostrowski-john1.html