Earth is safe from 'global warming'

[IDL]

No one in the world has that idea, though. That's just a right-wing fantasy.

The reality is that the gov't is a tool that we use to accomplish some things (um, like preventing environmental catastrophe) that require collective action.

Who is we?

 

[Jack V Savage]

If it is indeed happening I don't think it's man made.

If it isn't man made why should we jump into the arms of central governance? That is no answer. We'd be better off putting our efforts into more worthy causes.

Right. We have to trust big corporations to benevolently run things and stop letting the public have a voice in society. That's the only way to defeat the secret overlords of society.

Who is we?

We are us.

I am the walrus.

 

[IDL]

Right. We have to trust big corporations to benevolently run things and stop letting the public have a voice in society. That's the only way to defeat the secret overlords of society.



We are us.

I am the walrus.

Global governance (UN, WHO, IMF, BIS, ...) is a bigger power structure than Big oil and it is expanding.

the public should have a voice, but usually that voice comes from the effects of propaganda. That's how it works.. Public opinion is a powerful tool to be controlled.

In order to properly control people, their opinions must also be controlled.

then they 'choose' a predetermined solution.

Just like the war on terror. "they are out to take our freedoms!". If you can convince people of that then they will want their government to take action. That political capital is spent on taking rights away from people and furthering other objectives.

The only way democracy can function as advertised is if the raw truth is known to all. that isn't our system though.

Given the power of propaganda and control of the information, 'we' are largely a reflection of the desires of those in power.

manufacturing consent I think they call it.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Just wondering.

Dose anyone have any self-evident proof that man made climate change is objectively real? That's the biggest problem for people who believe in man made climate change, it has little to no self-evident proof. Some hockey-stick graph or chart really doesn't constitute "self-evident". Furthermore, how could one prove that any particular change in climate is man made (remember, correlation dose not mean causation)?

There are a variety of lines of evidence. The correlational data is ridiculously strong (the pseudo-intellectual internet mantra doesn't actually understand the value of correlational data). There is actual experimentation going back 100 years. There is isotopic data that definitively shows that CO2 increases are due to multiple types of human actions (fossil fuels, deforestation, etc).

Given what we know there's absolutely no way that pumping excess CO2 like we have been won't have an effect. That can be stated without any uncertainty. Where there is uncertainty is in regards to the potential magnitude of effects. The approach there has been to develop a variety of models and explore possible outputs across a variety of conditions. This generates rather than "an" effect, a range of possible effects. Since these models have been used they've actually been found to be more on the conservative side of things in regards to projections, with "negative" effects typically being worse than median model outputs.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Global governance (UN, WHO, IMF, BIS, ...) is a bigger power structure than Big oil and it is expanding.

the public should have a voice, but usually that voice comes from the effects of propaganda. That's how it works.. Public opinion is a powerful tool to be controlled.

So because the general public doesn't agree with you, they should not get a say in governance. Got it. Also, "global governance" is weak as shit. The idea that the WHO (WTF?), for example, has more control over Americans' lives than the company they work for or the corporations that control state gov'ts is laughable.

In order to properly control people, their opinions must also be controlled.

then they 'choose' a predetermined solution.

The only way democracy can function as advertised is if the raw truth is known to all. that isn't our system though.

Again, if you don't like the way that people vote, you are free to actually get off your ass and get involved in the process. Run for local office, donate money, form organizations, etc.

The effect of all the policy you advocate is to make big businesses more powerful and ordinary people weaker.

Given the power of propaganda and control of the information, 'we' are largely a reflection of the desires of those in power.

manufacturing consent I think they call it.

What does "in power," mean, though? What you're doing is saying that people haven't been propagandized enough, that we need to roll over even more for corporations. You should be pushing for more science education, more trust in evidence that can be verified through experiment, and less reliance on corporate propaganda. Instead, you're doing the opposite.

 

[Jukai]

If it is indeed happening I don't think it's man made.

If it isn't man made why should we jump into the arms of central governance? That is no answer. We'd be better off putting our efforts into more worthy causes.

Like stop giving away all of our taxes to the Vatican?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Like stop giving away all of our taxes to the Vatican?

I would support that.

 

[IDL]

So because the general public doesn't agree with you, they should not get a say in governance. Got it. Also, "global governance" is weak as shit. The idea that the WHO (WTF?), for example, has more control over Americans' lives than the company they work for or the corporations that control state gov'ts is laughable.



Again, if you don't like the way that people vote, you are free to actually get off your ass and get involved in the process. Run for local office, donate money, form organizations, etc.

The effect of all the policy you advocate is to make big businesses more powerful and ordinary people weaker.

Ordinary people become weaker the farther they are from their governing system. Who their governing system really is where we disagree. Most people think the president of the US is the most powerful man on the planet. That's just silly.

I'm advocating truth, that's all. How did you come to conclude I don't think people should have a say? Seems strange. I just hope for people to realize that most of what they see and here is propaganda. We are all free to discern for ourselves what the truth really is but in order to do that we must all understand the game.

the game is not taught to us, for obvious reasons.

Finding truth in this world is extremely difficult. Governing bodies do not want people to know what they are doing and have huge amounts of resources to steer people away.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Then perhaps you could answer my question a few posts back. Where is the self-evident proof of man made climate change? And how do you objectively prove that man is the cause to any particular change in climate? Remember, correlation =/= causation.

Correlation does, however, give clues about causation. The correlative evidence is incredibly strong. As I said in my response, ended up talking with a colleague while in the middle of it, there are multiple lines of evidence empirical and correlative. The issue is what level of evidence you want because denialist groups, like creationists, seem to have a moving line on standards of evidence. Ultimately we're limited because we only have one Earth and so can't conduct replicated experiments on planets. Unfortunately.

To be frank, this was uncalled for from someone as educated as you. You're obviously smart enough to know better. Learn to respect those who think differently from you. Your life will be happier and brighter for it.

To be frank, you're wholly incorrect. I respect those who warrant respect even when they disagree with me. IDL doesn't deserve respect because he uncritically accepts every CT out there without evaluating evidence even when that requires holding mutually exclusive CT's as true.
I'm quite happy keeping some standards as to who warrants respect.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Like stop giving away all of our taxes to the Vatican?

Sounds fine to me too.

 

[IDL]

IDL doesn't deserve respect because he uncritically accepts every CT out there without evaluating evidence even when that requires holding mutually exclusive CT's as true.

You don't know how I think or what I know. You are making grand assumptions based on a few text interactions. Maybe you don't understand me and that's fine, but don't assume you know all there is to know about how I have come to my own understanding on things.

 

[UpaLoompa]

You don't know how I think or what I know. You are making grand assumptions based on a few text interactions. Maybe you don't understand me and that's fine, but don't assume you know all there is to know about how I have come to my own understanding on things.

How you think is patently clear, you're not exactly a puzzle box.

 

[Jukai]

How you think is patently clear, you're not exactly a puzzle box.

 

[IDL]

How you think is patently clear, you're not exactly a puzzle box.

Coming to conclusions based on very limited data is very unscientific, friend

It's a complex world we live in and it didn't just start the day we were born. That was the day our programming started

 

[UpaLoompa]

You're on my list too, I would have liked to play bingo.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Coming to conclusions based on very limited data is very unscientific, friend

It's a complex world we live in with a high number of variables.

Small sample sizes can be sufficient when there is a large effect size.

 

[afrdzak]

You're on my list too, I would have liked to play bingo.

LOL.
I feel scorned as well!

 

[IDL]

Small sample sizes can be sufficient when there is a large effect size.

Well I don't like to get into bickering modes, so we will have to agree to disagree I guess.

 

[Jukai]

You're on my list too, I would have liked to play bingo.

LOL.
I feel scorned as well!

 

[Wolveswithkeys]

manufacturing consent I think they call it.

no try again. that isn't on the new bingo cards.