Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: OT: The End is Near........

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: OT: The End is Near........ Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 3:33:40 AM   
T Rav

 

Posts: 289
Joined: 5/29/2004
Status: offline
I feel like I'm in a bad movie... but I can't help myself. But "I DID!"

I had a whole diatribe written but instead I'll just say that I go with CR and Co.

T Rav




(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 31
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 6:47:32 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 40511
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

https://www.dailywire.com/news/millennial-reality-tv-star-teaching-students-about-world-war-ii-bad-for-their-mental-health

The world will end when the snow flake generation comes to power.

It isn't going to be pretty and I can only hope I don't live long enough to see it.


Kids care right now because it's their future at stake.

I grew up in the Cold War. I was not confident in the future then, and there was no guarantee all-out nuclear war wouldn't happen. These kids are concerned about their future, and while there is no guarantee climate change will cause an apocalypse, I can see why they're not really confident in the politics that to them seem to be ignoring the obvious hedge of changing our energy practices.

warspite1

I think its great that some kids are showing they care - the plastic in the ocean is pretty frightening for example. The problem is not when they care, its when they think they know it all and only their way of caring should count. So with the bleeding hearts of Rebellion Extinction or whatever they are called. Why don't they go take up their grievances with China rather than making me late for work.... or perhaps that's too much on the difficult pile.....

There is a parallel with the cold war and the usually well meaning, but hopelessly irresponsible CND crowd. Yes sure, lets get rid of Nuclear Weapons - starting with those of the west.... because protesting in the Soviet Union is all a bit too difficult.....



- The only way to deal with large-scale pollution from developing nations with China is by leadership on the international stage. That's only going to happen with large-scale protests domestically, because elsewise industrial and economic interests will effectively "drown out" the case for a pro-environmental stance. Basically, nobody is going to stand up to the Chinese unless they know the population is behind them, due to the economic weight China has internationally.

- It's fine to mock the CND, but do you live in a target zone? I do, and would prefer not to.

FWIW, I take the position that if there's any point wherein the use of nuclear weapons is appropriate, it's already too late.

Since the end of the Cold War, the strong likelihood of additional nuclear powers is off-setting the balance of power in the global nuclear arsenal. I have some faith in the rationality of the previous "Big Five" nuclear powers (to some extent), but with developments in the Middle East, I think there needs to be international disarmament before millions die.

warspite1

Why are protests the only way - and why of the type they choose to mount? Let me just remind you of what Extinction Rebellion said during the wholly unproductive, wholly pointless and wholly pathetic attempts to shut London down. This one comment sums up what I said about their vacuous, almost childlike thinking.

When those intelligent free zones stood on the trains to stop them moving ER said, we don't wish to inconvenience everyday people - we want to stop business as usual. That is why we made the decision to stop trains in the morning, to stop people getting to work, but not in the evening when people want to get home to their homes and families......

Take a second to re-read that. So, no one trying to get on a train in the morning was trying to get home having worked nights, no one was a doctor/nurse, a policeman, an ambulance driver, a fireman, a member of the armed forces, a kid fresh out of university heading for the most important job interview of their life? Their cause isn't necessarily a bad thing, their actions redefine the word pathetic.

As for CND, yes I mock them (though as said I believe many were sincere and well meaning) for - like ER above - the totally dumb way they went about things. Get rid of nuclear weapons unilaterally - starting with the west..... right.

Oh and as for "do you live in a target zone" well yes, yes I do (I'm sure London had a special place in the thoughts of Moscow ) although if nuclear holocaust erupted I don't really think any part of the UK wouldn't have been - so that's all a bit academic.



_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 32
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 11:26:49 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2400
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

It's a truism that one should never discuss religion or politics. And unfortunately, the "environment" has become a religion for a sizable percentage of the population, to include many of those who fund and perform research.

As for the snowflakes, I suppose that time will tell. I was pretty useless up until my mid-twenties, and am heartened that two of my formerly SJW step-daughters are slowly shifting their world view as time goes by. Every new generation can't hold a candle to those which came before. Just ask those who came before.


[Citation needed]


quote:

ORIGINAL: NigelKentarus

I used to have a subscription to World Weekly News when I was deployed in late '80s early '90s. It was great, every mail call my shipmates laughed about my papers, but they all wanted them when I was done. It was entertainment interspersed with truth (personnel knowledge of a gruesome murder in my home town across the street of my Grandparents). As far as climate change...BS...the earth cools...the earth warms. Science has proved Cooling/Warming periods for 10s of 1000s of years.


Really? I'd be interested to read the paper that was proposing that.


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

https://www.dailywire.com/news/millennial-reality-tv-star-teaching-students-about-world-war-ii-bad-for-their-mental-health

The world will end when the snow flake generation comes to power.

It isn't going to be pretty and I can only hope I don't live long enough to see it.


Kids care right now because it's their future at stake.

I grew up in the Cold War. I was not confident in the future then, and there was no guarantee all-out nuclear war wouldn't happen. These kids are concerned about their future, and while there is no guarantee climate change will cause an apocalypse, I can see why they're not really confident in the politics that to them seem to be ignoring the obvious hedge of changing our energy practices.

warspite1

I think its great that some kids are showing they care - the plastic in the ocean is pretty frightening for example. The problem is not when they care, its when they think they know it all and only their way of caring should count. So with the bleeding hearts of Rebellion Extinction or whatever they are called. Why don't they go take up their grievances with China rather than making me late for work.... or perhaps that's too much on the difficult pile.....

There is a parallel with the cold war and the usually well meaning, but hopelessly irresponsible CND crowd. Yes sure, lets get rid of Nuclear Weapons - starting with those of the west.... because protesting in the Soviet Union is all a bit too difficult.....



- The only way to deal with large-scale pollution from developing nations with China is by leadership on the international stage. That's only going to happen with large-scale protests domestically, because elsewise industrial and economic interests will effectively "drown out" the case for a pro-environmental stance. Basically, nobody is going to stand up to the Chinese unless they know the population is behind them, due to the economic weight China has internationally.

- It's fine to mock the CND, but do you live in a target zone? I do, and would prefer not to.

FWIW, I take the position that if there's any point wherein the use of nuclear weapons is appropriate, it's already too late.

Since the end of the Cold War, the strong likelihood of additional nuclear powers is off-setting the balance of power in the global nuclear arsenal. I have some faith in the rationality of the previous "Big Five" nuclear powers (to some extent), but with developments in the Middle East, I think there needs to be international disarmament before millions die.

warspite1

Why are protests the only way - and why of the type they choose to mount? Let me just remind you of what Extinction Rebellion said during the wholly unproductive, wholly pointless and wholly pathetic attempts to shut London down. This one comment sums up what I said about their vacuous, almost childlike thinking.

When those intelligent free zones stood on the trains to stop them moving ER said, we don't wish to inconvenience everyday people - we want to stop business as usual. That is why we made the decision to stop trains in the morning, to stop people getting to work, but not in the evening when people want to get home to their homes and families......

Take a second to re-read that. So, no one trying to get on a train in the morning was trying to get home having worked nights, no one was a doctor/nurse, a policeman, an ambulance driver, a fireman, a member of the armed forces, a kid fresh out of university heading for the most important job interview of their life? Their cause isn't necessarily a bad thing, their actions redefine the word pathetic.

As for CND, yes I mock them (though as said I believe many were sincere and well meaning) for - like ER above - the totally dumb way they went about things. Get rid of nuclear weapons unilaterally - starting with the west..... right.

Oh and as for "do you live in a target zone" well yes, yes I do (I'm sure London had a special place in the thoughts of Moscow ) although if nuclear holocaust erupted I don't really think any part of the UK wouldn't have been - so that's all a bit academic.




These kinds of protests are the only way because they are impossible to ignore. And it works. You're now aware of what the group is and what their message is, when you likely wouldn't have before.

As for your appeal to emotion, I've no doubt you'd have blamed Rosa Parks for delaying your bus trip in the morning, or Gandhi for putting the collectors of the salt tax out of a job.

Real, positive change when the establishment is against it requires these kinds of demonstrations, to communicate the message that the dissent won't go away. Hong Kong currently is an exceptionally good example of what these kinds of protests can do.

RE: CND - as I said, you could count on the European powers to have a degree of rationality. Less so with other nuclear nations with deeper issues. A degree of leadership and compromise is needed between the US-EU-Russia bloc before this issue lands millions turns to ashes.

(in reply to Kull)
Post #: 33
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 11:36:31 AM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I didn't read it at all, Mind Messing. I haven't had time yet. I have no idea what it says, pro or con. So I wasn't referring to it or quoting from it in my comments.

If the current climate "consensus" is wrong, there will be serious detriments to go with the collateral benefits of trying to offset what's happening.


Please outline those.

I think you'll find that serious investment in environmentally friendly technologies (renewable energy, electric transportation etc) has a wide variety of benefits with limited downsides (mostly financial in terms of investment, but wider considerations around the decline of the oil and gas sector).

quote:

The climate situation has generated a mass of attention that will have, if wrong, diverted us from more important climate/earth/pollution issues. We will have spent countless amounts of money on a chimera. We have created political parties and other things based on falsehoods or distortions. And we will have touted and promoted bad scientists (those proved to be wrong) while marginalizing and scoffing at and hounding and dismissing those who were right.

These are my own thoughts, not things I've read elsewhere. And I give those thoughts qualified by "if climate science is wrong." If it's right, then my position and analysis is of course wrong. :)


There are no "more important climate/earth/pollution issues".

Even entertaining this argument for a moment, the appropriate response to any of these issues would be the same as outlined above - transitioning into environmentally friendly technologies and lifestyles.

The environmental problems beyond climate change are diverse, but they all have the same solution - transitioning into environmentally friendly technologies and lifestyles.

Perhaps you reject climate change (despite the evidence being there in front of you), but you can't deny the whole host of other environmental issues: waste in landfills and in the ocean, widespread deforestation, large-scale extinction of species. Burying your head in the sand is an option, but there's too much going on for that to work in drowning out the problems.


quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

As Spock would say - live long and prosper.

The young ones now have their issues, as we did when we were young ones. Though I think our generation has not helped their development. I think the snowflake comment is spot on. I was nailing shingles on roofs when I was 8. Before I retired I don't think I saw a single resume/CV of someone who worked before they graduated University. I don't have kids (other than furry creatures), but the number of times I had to tell staff to get off their bottoms and walk down three cubes to speak to their colleagues instead of texting them really drove me to the edge. Not a religious type but I do hope things get better sooner rather than later.


Out of interest, how many of your age cohort went to university? The changing dynamic of university-level education is another topic that might be interesting to explore.

Not a clue, but very likely much lower than the percentages today. Not everyone needs a degree and my electrician and tile guy make a tidy income. My parents did not graduate from high school, but they did OK. But they worked from a very young age. But I am not clear to the gist of your question here?

quote:

In my (non-kid) opinion, the current Gen is over coddled. Give them a shovel and let them shovel the snow.

As for global climate change - we will all be planted before we know if it is real or not. Which is good and bad, but this planet is a fairly robust beast. And now if I could get my utility provider to allow my solar panels to feed the grid, it would be helpful, but it has been three months already.

Oh - and the guy in the video comes across as a self righteous ****. We need fewer of him in the world.


Speak for yourself. Some of us haven't even passed the half-way mark yet.

I was speaking for myself. And I suspect most of the folks on this forum are fairly close to my age. I am happy for you that that you are younger.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

We may have a notion whether the climate science "consensus" is right. They've been making predictions for at least 30 years and especially 20. And they keep getting them wildly wrong. You know, "No more snow within 20 years!" and things like that. I understand that making wrong predictions doesn't always correlate with being wrong but it's worth watching and listening.

We went through this discussion last year (or very early this year) when news reports said that Tarawa will be under water in "a couple of decades" or "20 years" or some such. We'll get to that point 20 years out. Tarawa will still be just as it is today. The climate scientists will explain that away, as they do every inconsistent statement. And that doesn't mean that they're wrong. But it does suggest that they aren't infallible. :)


I understand your resistance to some extent. It's hard to accept that the way of life you have known since birth is causing serious environmental damage. It's hard to accept that the current status quo is absolutely not sustainable, even in the short-term. It's hard to understand that effective change means a large lifestyle shift.

The solution, however, is not to deny it completely. It's a morally bankrupt position.

We do know that the climate science consensus is right, in so far as the consensus has resulted from close examination of the evidence.


Actually we don't. That said, there is no harm in treating the environment better. At least where I live it is not hard to recycle and composting is easy (but I don't live in an urban area - it would be much more difficult in that setting). It drives me nuts when my contractors throw plastic bottles and cardboard into the trash bin that is sitting right next to the recycling bin. I end up bin diving to sort that out. And the plastic in the ocean is a serious problem. I think I saw a documentary that a bunch of it washes up on Midway. And should we ban fishing because of the damage that lost nets produce?
It is not all binary.....

To use a medical analogy: if you are exhibiting the symptoms of sepsis, and 99 of 100 doctors that assess you determine that you have sepsis.

Would you then follow the advice of the lone doctor who thought that, although you had all the symptoms of sepsis, you might have cancer instead?


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 34
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 11:42:56 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7076
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
I will apologize in advance for my sloppy dyslexic typing.

I'm not sure how this thread got side tracked into a climate debate when all I was doing was lamenting the fragility of the Millenial psyche.

I appreciate the response from Obvert who stayed on topic.

To MM I have this to say and please bear with me as explaining where I come from and what positions I take requires some back story.

As many here likely know I am an astronomer as well as a wargamer. I have had a lifelong interest in astronomy.
I have also had a lifelong interest in the related field of cosmology.
From 1980 through the late 1990s I engaged in what was comparable to a college level self study pursuit of an understanding of the science of cosmology.
This inevitably led to a study of quantum physics.
I am no longer well read on the on subject of QP, found it to be very daunting and do not claim to be an expert on the subject.

The reason for my pursuit of study in the field of cosmology waning in the late 90s resulted from watching cosmology get hijacked by mathematicians and develop into more of a religion than a science.
In the 90s String Theory came along.
A purely mathematical theory with no basis in emperical evidence.
String Theory can be used to mathematically predict many things about the structure of the universe that have already been proven to be accurate.
However, the very mathematical basis of ST requires that the universe posses 11 dimensions, 7 of which are "curved in upon themselves in a manner that makes them indiscernable".
This is quite likely the single greatest piece of scientific double speak ever uttered.
What this means is that ST can NEVER be tested to determine if it is real.

The very principles of science are predicated upon the ability to test, not so much to prove as to fail to disprove.
Any theory that can't be tested isn't science.
Over the course of the 90s as ST became more and more "accepted as the concensus amongst the cabal of professional scientists" it adopted more and more of the aspects of a religion.
The degree of acceptability of one's untestable theories become dependent upon one's status within the hierarchy of professional 'big science'.
This is when the reality of teh existence of 'big science' was driven home to me.
BS being of course, the agenda driven consensus of those holding emminent postions within the hierarchy, who control access to research funding and access to reaearch grade equipment.
I began to become aware of how any scientist with sufficient audacity to question 'prevailing wisdom' was being discounted, dismissed, shouted down and deinied access.

One fine example of this is astrophysicist Halton Arp, who has had teh audacity to question prevailing wisdom on the interpretation of the meaning of teh redshift.
He has, time and time again, presented one example after another of quasars who's interpreted redshift places them billions of light years away are physically linked by visible trails of matter to adjacent galaxies who's interpreted redshift places them mere millions of LY away.
Every last example he has presented has been summarily dismissed by the cabal. He has been denied time on research grade telescopes.

Big Science does exist and fights very hard to maintain the consensus of "prevailing wisom' shouting down and ostracizing any who refuse to tow the party line.


As a result of becoming disillusioned with Big Science, I found myslef in the early 2,000s reading more and more self published books by scientists presenting alternative theories.
Did this expose me to many crackpot theories? Most likely. However, unlike many with closed minds i don't automatically presume that every self published scientific theory is crackpot based.
I can recal two in particular that made strong impressions. One was The Eletric Sky, that proposed the notion that the effects of electromagnetism on plasma has had a stronger influence n the development of the structure of the universe than gravity.
Another was The Deep Hot Biosphere, that proposed that oil is not a fossil fuel, but rather a fuel being produced by the deep hot biosphere of the planet.
Oil has been discovered in igneous rock, where the theory of it being produced by the pressures of sedimentary build up has no validity.
Oil fields that should have dried up long ago are being replenished.

Do I autmoatically buy into any of these alternate theories? Absolutely not. But the willingness to examine them has broadened my horizons and helped me to look upon "current prevailing wisdom of the cabal" with a healthy does of scepticism.

Now, as to the subject of so called Global Warming aka Climate change I approach it a healthy dose of scepticism. There is NO global concensus among scientists.
There is a consensus amongst those entrenched in Big Science with political agendas. The majority of the 'consensu' lies with UN funded scientists pursuing political agenda resulting it receivinga healhty dose of that scepticism.
There are a plethora of scientists planet wide, all with strong credentials, that have no qualms over calling out those who side with the 'consensus'.

The simple reality is that attempting to utilize 150 years of badly gathered, inaccurate, and sometimes altered data accummulation, as a basis for stating that we sufficiently understand the compelxities of a system to be able to make accurate, irrefutable, predictions represents the height of human arrogance.
There are simply too many variables we don't fully understand yet and who knows how many more we are simply unawre of.
The effects of perturbations in the earth's orbit are only just now beginning to be undertsood and there are some who are speculating that this variable may have as great an influence of teh cycle of ice ages as the fluxuations in the output of the sun.

The so called 'consensus on the reality of a human caused global climate emergency' has far too many of teh aspects of a religion for me to be willing to accept it as scientific fact.
This is especially evidenced in the vociferous and overly passionate manner in which 'believers' seek to shout down, discount and dismiss any willing to say "he wait a minute, not so fast on accepting this as fact'.

You, yourself, are proving this to be true MM.

For a very, very long time the 'consensus of prevailing wisdom of the cabal' was that the earth was flat and the center of the universe.
This alone, should be adequate warning to use all to be willing to question 'accepted prevailing wisdom'.






< Message edited by HansBolter -- 11/2/2019 11:47:56 AM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 35
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 12:05:07 PM   
obvert


Posts: 13290
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online
NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.

NASA: Global Climate Change Evidence

On their site there is a section dedicated to climate change which has all the data anyone would need to understand it. The graph below is still the most objectively indisputable evidence that human activity is helping to create and release CO2 into the atmosphere contributing to the current rise in temperature.

There is no point in history where carbon and temperature have risen together so quickly or to such high levels.

The incentive to reduce carbon emissions is great, and while there is some cost involved in changing energy practices, agriculture practices, lifestyle choices, etc, there are direct economic and social benefits as well.

What reason do we have to not grow and make better choices as new technologies, possibilities and advantages become available? Most Corporations already see this and are doing something about it because they realise it will not only save them money but might generate new revenue streams, markets and customers.











Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 36
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 12:08:04 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7076
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.




This is simply not true.


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 37
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 12:11:01 PM   
obvert


Posts: 13290
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.




This is simply not true.



How is it not true?

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 38
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 12:14:55 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7076
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.




This is simply not true.



How is it not true?



NASA represents the very embodiment of Big Science.

NASA scientists regularly participate in the shouting down and ostracizing of dissenters.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 39
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 12:26:15 PM   
obvert


Posts: 13290
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.




This is simply not true.



How is it not true?



NASA represents the very embodiment of Big Science.

NASA scientists regularly participate in the shouting down and ostracizing of dissenters.


Ok. So you don't like big science. Fine.

Do you think all the scientists in the 97% who do support the human role in climate change are all BIG SCIENCE jerks who don't support their arguments with data? It sounds like you're basically saying you don't believe in all the tenets of science, like peer review, publication, multiple opportunities to test data and resulting theories.

What about the data on the graph? I can read and understand this evidence and see correlation. I could write a paper on this but it seems clear to me without doing that.

I get doubt, and I understand the interest in thinking outside prevailing opinion, but I usually test my own theories vigorously when I step outside the box.

Why should we not at least begin to develop and use better, cleaner forms of energy both for the potential of a cleaner, less polluted atmosphere, less reliance on foreign fossil fuels, less cost to transport and process fuels, and cheaper more sustainable energy? Is there a downside to those ideas?

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 40
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 12:52:31 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online
The downsides are largely cost and economic realities. As I posted before I do what I can when it comes to being 'green'. That said, we built a detached garage over the last year - which a true 'Greenie' would object to as a waste of resources. But we were required to put in all electrical outlets on separate circuits to enable safe electric car charging in the future (or I guess present). This added quite a bit of infrastructure which I will never use. I still drive my reasonably fuel efficient 1988 Saab 900. It is not getting swapped for an electric car (and it is a stick which makes it much more fun to drive than most of what is being produced today).

Over-regulating the world is not going to usher in a new green age. Companies and people will make decisions based on the data they have to hand. I have solar panels on my house and garage. I have almost completely converted to LED lighting, but in a few fixtures it just does not work, so thank you big govt for regulating some incandescent light bulbs out of existence. There was ice outside this morning but my heating is set to 60 degrees F. I can put on a sweater.

Live and let live I say.

And anyone who thinks a country will unilaterlly decide to take the high road and ban things while other countries do not, is being naive. Visit China if you don't believe me.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 41
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:07:30 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2400
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
quote:

Not a clue, but very likely much lower than the percentages today. Not everyone needs a degree and my electrician and tile guy make a tidy income. My parents did not graduate from high school, but they did OK. But they worked from a very young age. But I am not clear to the gist of your question here?


Just curious.

I have found that there's a certain aversion to higher education amongst some groups of American's that I've known.

Just because a degree is not needed does not mean it has no value.

I am a big proponent of education just for the sake of education :)

quote:

I will apologize in advance for my sloppy dyslexic typing.

I'm not sure how this thread got side tracked into a climate debate when all I was doing was lamenting the fragility of the Millenial psyche.

I appreciate the response from Obvert who stayed on topic.

To MM I have this to say and please bear with me as explaining where I come from and what positions I take requires some back story.

[edit for brevity]

You, yourself, are proving this to be true MM.

For a very, very long time the 'consensus of prevailing wisdom of the cabal' was that the earth was flat and the center of the universe.
This alone, should be adequate warning to use all to be willing to question 'accepted prevailing wisdom'.


A few thoughts based on this:

- The comparison between quantum physics and climate change is tenuous at best, given we have far, far much more direct evidence of climate change compared to the overall theoretical nature of quantum physics.

- and yet, there are still people who persist that the world is indeed flat, despite the evidence to the contrary. Climate change deniers have joined that group.


quote:

Now, as to the subject of so called Global Warming aka Climate change I approach it a healthy dose of scepticism. There is NO global consensus among scientists.
There is a consensus amongst those entrenched in Big Science with political agendas. The majority of the 'consensus' lies with UN funded scientists pursuing political agenda resulting it receiving a healthy dose of that scepticism.
There are a plethora of scientists planet wide, all with strong credentials, that have no qualms over calling out those who side with the 'consensus'.


Untrue. See above article I posted - this examines just why there is such a consensus on the topic.

The consensus is not down to the machinations of "big science" - if there was such a force able to comply such adherence to the "party line" over such a diverse body of scientists and academics, then we'd have bigger concerns.

No, it's the result of examination of the evidence, even if it is more comforting to think of it as being down to a vague, mysterious plot by "big science".

quote:

The downsides are largely cost and economic realities. As I posted before I do what I can when it comes to being 'green'. That said, we built a detached garage over the last year - which a true 'Greenie' would object to as a waste of resources. But we were required to put in all electrical outlets on separate circuits to enable safe electric car charging in the future (or I guess present). This added quite a bit of infrastructure which I will never use. I still drive my reasonably fuel efficient 1988 Saab 900. It is not getting swapped for an electric car (and it is a stick which makes it much more fun to drive than most of what is being produced today).

Over-regulating the world is not going to usher in a new green age. Companies and people will make decisions based on the data they have to hand. I have solar panels on my house and garage. I have almost completely converted to LED lighting, but in a few fixtures it just does not work, so thank you big govt for regulating some incandescent light bulbs out of existence. There was ice outside this morning but my heating is set to 60 degrees F. I can put on a sweater.

Live and let live I say.

And anyone who thinks a country will unilaterlly decide to take the high road and ban things while other countries do not, is being naive. Visit China if you don't believe me.


Regulation is needed as elsewise nothing will be done. There is plenty of precedent for this - it is worth reading into why there is an Environmental Protection Agency in the first place (short summary - companies like to make profits by dumping waste).

The "China does worse" argument is a hollow one. The international community permits it. The Chinese disregard for the environment is only going to be stopped when the international community is willing to make a stand. That is going to happen when international leaders know that they have the domestic support to do so.

So, stopping Chinese disregard for the environment starts at home :)


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 42
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:18:29 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 19744
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
I didn't set out to think outside the box. I developed thoughts, kept testing them, and eventually those thoughts were no longer mainstream. But that didn't matter to me because I believed what I studied and trusted my integrity in reaching the conclusions.

We all agree that good environmental policy and progress is the objective. The problem is that a significant portion of the funds spent on the Global Warming idea could've been fruitfully spent on the real threats (assuming GW or Climate Change is a fallacy, as I believe). I'd rather have spent $5 billion on cleaning up the ocean or landfill alternatives or recycling than in promoting things that were flawed or wrongheaded. I don't think the climate change folks understand that if CC is wrong, we've had a massive and hurtful misallocation of funds and brainpower. Not everything was a waste, but a certain significant percentage was.

Not all scientists are jerks or intentionally wrong, of course. Many in good faith accept the teaching of others. But CC has become "fact" rather than "theory" and, as Hans stated, there is an element of religious fervor to it. The CC proponents are willing to go to extremes to silence dissent. They have been calls to decertify skeptical scientists. There have been calls to criminalize skepticism (I'm not making that up). There is serious discrimination in education against those who disbelieve. So the scientific world has veered into a weird state where they perpetuate their own theories, deride and ignore those in opposition, and have no interest in entertaining further consideration of alternatives.

NASA, like most agencies and universities, is ostensibly neutral politically. However, over the years it has become populated by the majority who won't tolerate dissent. So they perpetuate their beliefs, true or not. That's the culture in science today because of their certainty they are right and the dissenters are dolts/crazy/misguided/dangerous. Re-read MindMessing's comments and you see the extent of his passion. He believes in what he believes so strongly that he is openly contemptuous of those he disagrees with. He doesn't realize it because of his good faith passion. That's exactly the culture we see in universities and agencies.

As for the hockey stick graph, that was pretty much discredited many years ago.


(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 43
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:19:08 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7076
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.




This is simply not true.



How is it not true?



NASA represents the very embodiment of Big Science.

NASA scientists regularly participate in the shouting down and ostracizing of dissenters.


Ok. So you don't like big science. Fine.

Do you think all the scientists in the 97% who do support the human role in climate change are all BIG SCIENCE jerks who don't support their arguments with data? It sounds like you're basically saying you don't believe in all the tenets of science, like peer review, publication, multiple opportunities to test data and resulting theories.

What about the data on the graph? I can read and understand this evidence and see correlation. I could write a paper on this but it seems clear to me without doing that.

I get doubt, and I understand the interest in thinking outside prevailing opinion, but I usually test my own theories vigorously when I step outside the box.

Why should we not at least begin to develop and use better, cleaner forms of energy both for the potential of a cleaner, less polluted atmosphere, less reliance on foreign fossil fuels, less cost to transport and process fuels, and cheaper more sustainable energy? Is there a downside to those ideas?



Are peer reviews conducted by those enslaved to the dogma of the cabal valid?

The data on the graph is the very same data I referred to as having been inadaquately gathered and sometimes proven to have been altered. What about the plethora of temperature reading stations improperly located in urban heat sinks providing skewed data?

I am in no way against pursuing alternative, cleaner forms of energy. I am adamantly against slavish adherence to dogma and allowing that adherence to lead one to desire not only to shut down dissent, but lead to outlawing of that dissent and violence against dissenters, which is the path that the fascist leftists are on.

By the way,I hope its clear that I harbor no animosities toward anyone here for their beliefs and passions. I am also thankful that thus far the debate has been civil. Lets keep it that way.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 11/2/2019 1:23:31 PM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 44
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:23:10 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 40511
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

These kinds of protests are the only way because they are impossible to ignore. And it works. You're now aware of what the group is and what their message is, when you likely wouldn't have before.

As for your appeal to emotion, I've no doubt you'd have blamed Rosa Parks for delaying your bus trip in the morning, or Gandhi for putting the collectors of the salt tax out of a job.

Real, positive change when the establishment is against it requires these kinds of demonstrations, to communicate the message that the dissent won't go away. Hong Kong currently is an exceptionally good example of what these kinds of protests can do.

RE: CND - as I said, you could count on the European powers to have a degree of rationality. Less so with other nuclear nations with deeper issues. A degree of leadership and compromise is needed between the US-EU-Russia bloc before this issue lands millions turns to ashes.

warspite1

These kind of protests aren't the only way. These time wasters and wastes of space (acknowledging too there are those who genuinely care) always seek to destroy, to hurt, to make life unpleasant for those just seeking to go about their business. Which is a bit ironic really as they claim to be about the opposite.

Why don't they try something really effective - something that will hurt the government big time - but moreover, run the risk of hurting themselves too - if they believe so much in their cause its a small price to pay surely?

Why not simply refuse to pay any tax, no council tax or income tax? That gives the Government (local and national) a real problem, and then if the government decides to prosecute, this rent a mob can individually martyr themselves with a jail sentence.

Instead of bringing the capital to a grinding halt with all the misery - economic and otherwise - that that means for hard working people, why not try that and have any misery suffered by themselves? Of course we know the reasons that isn't so tempting a proposition.....

Re CND - exactly, you could count on rationality - but that didn't stop Ruddock, Kent and co from spouting their dangerous nonsense on behalf of the Kremlin did it?





< Message edited by warspite1 -- 11/2/2019 1:32:07 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 45
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:36:54 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2400
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
Now we get at the real meat of the opposing position :)

quote:

I didn't set out to think outside the box. I developed thoughts, kept testing them, and eventually those thoughts were no longer mainstream. But that didn't matter to me because I believed what I studied and trusted my integrity in reaching the conclusions.


What was your methodology for testing?

quote:

We all agree that good environmental policy and progress is the objective. The problem is that a significant portion of the funds spent on the Global Warming idea could've been fruitfully spent on the real threats (assuming GW or Climate Change is a fallacy, as I believe). I'd rather have spent $5 billion on cleaning up the ocean or landfill alternatives or recycling than in promoting things that were flawed or wrongheaded. I don't think the climate change folks understand that if CC is wrong, we've had a massive and hurtful misallocation of funds and brainpower. Not everything was a waste, but a certain significant percentage was.


Big assumption.

Got any evidence?

quote:

Not all scientists are jerks or intentionally wrong, of course. Many in good faith accept the teaching of others. But CC has become "fact" rather than "theory" and, as Hans stated, there is an element of religious fervor to it. The CC proponents are willing to go to extremes to silence dissent. They have been calls to decertify skeptical scientists. There have been calls to criminalize skepticism (I'm not making that up). There is serious discrimination in education against those who disbelieve. So the scientific world has veered into a weird state where they perpetuate their own theories, deride and ignore those in opposition, and have no interest in entertaining further consideration of alternatives.


This is part of a much wider issue and very serious issue surrounding how the academic and scientific community interact with modern media.

Sceptics of climate change are given equal footing with those presenting evidence in favour of climate change. There is an overwhelming body of evidence in favour of climate change, and virtually no serious studies opposing it.

Yet, to the vast majority of people (Hans and Canoe included), it appears to be two equal arguments.

It's not. And this is dangerous.

We can already see just how harmful it has been with regards to the anti-vaccination movement. Due to irresponsible science, a passive media and general ignorance on the issues, we're seeing the resurgence of massive public health problems that previously have been eradicated.

quote:

NASA, like most agencies and universities, is ostensibly neutral politically. However, over the years it has become populated by the majority who won't tolerate dissent. So they perpetuate their beliefs, true or not. That's the culture in science today because of their certainty they are right and the dissenters are dolts/crazy/misguided/dangerous. Re-read MindMessing's comments and you see the extent of his passion. He believes in what he believes so strongly that he is openly contemptuous of those he disagrees with. He doesn't realize it because of his good faith passion. That's exactly the culture we see in universities and agencies.


In short, intellectualism bad. Right Canoe?

Go look at the evidence. The cold, hard figures have no agenda and are open to your own interpretation.

I've posted some articles for discussion.

There's been absolutely none from the opposing side on this debate. It's almost as if the opposing argument considers their own viewpoints on the issue as being equally informed as the experts.

I'd much prefer a discussion around the actual evidence rather than a debate about my passion (or lack thereof) or the political independence of NASA.

quote:


As for the hockey stick graph, that was pretty much discredited many years ago.


Really?

Who by?

Lets see the evidence.

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

NASA is a bipartisan, US government agency that has no bias or affiliation to any party, group or ideology except scientific objectivity.




This is simply not true.



How is it not true?



NASA represents the very embodiment of Big Science.

NASA scientists regularly participate in the shouting down and ostracizing of dissenters.


Ok. So you don't like big science. Fine.

Do you think all the scientists in the 97% who do support the human role in climate change are all BIG SCIENCE jerks who don't support their arguments with data? It sounds like you're basically saying you don't believe in all the tenets of science, like peer review, publication, multiple opportunities to test data and resulting theories.

What about the data on the graph? I can read and understand this evidence and see correlation. I could write a paper on this but it seems clear to me without doing that.

I get doubt, and I understand the interest in thinking outside prevailing opinion, but I usually test my own theories vigorously when I step outside the box.

Why should we not at least begin to develop and use better, cleaner forms of energy both for the potential of a cleaner, less polluted atmosphere, less reliance on foreign fossil fuels, less cost to transport and process fuels, and cheaper more sustainable energy? Is there a downside to those ideas?



Are peer reviews conducted by those enslaved to the dogma of the cabal valid?

The data on the graph is the very same data I referred to as having been inadaquately gathered and sometimes proven to have been altered. What about the plethora of temperature reading stations improperly located in urban heat sinks providing skewed data?

I am in no way against pursuing alternative, cleaner forms of energy. I am adamantly against slavish adherence to dogma and allowing that adherence to lead one to desire not only to shut down dissent, but lead to outlawing of that dissent and violence against dissenters, which is the path that the fascist leftists are on.

By the way,I hope its clear that I harbor no animosities toward anyone here for their beliefs and passions. I am also thankful that thus far the debate has been civil. Lets keep it that way.


Well, lets see the critique paper. I have a preference for seeing things first hand rather than at second-hand.


< Message edited by mind_messing -- 11/2/2019 1:44:24 PM >

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 46
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:43:50 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2400
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

These kinds of protests are the only way because they are impossible to ignore. And it works. You're now aware of what the group is and what their message is, when you likely wouldn't have before.

As for your appeal to emotion, I've no doubt you'd have blamed Rosa Parks for delaying your bus trip in the morning, or Gandhi for putting the collectors of the salt tax out of a job.

Real, positive change when the establishment is against it requires these kinds of demonstrations, to communicate the message that the dissent won't go away. Hong Kong currently is an exceptionally good example of what these kinds of protests can do.

RE: CND - as I said, you could count on the European powers to have a degree of rationality. Less so with other nuclear nations with deeper issues. A degree of leadership and compromise is needed between the US-EU-Russia bloc before this issue lands millions turns to ashes.

warspite1

These kind of protests aren't the only way. These time wasters and wastes of space (acknowledging too there are those who genuinely care) always seek to destroy, to hurt, to make life unpleasant for those just seeking to go about their business. Which is a bit ironic really as they claim to be about the opposite.

Why don't they try something really effective - something that will hurt the government big time - but moreover, run the risk of hurting themselves too - if they believe so much in their cause its a small price to pay surely?

Why not simply refuse to pay any tax, no council tax or income tax? That gives the Government (local and national) a real problem, and then if the government decides to prosecute, this rent a mob can individually martyr themselves with a jail sentence.

Instead of bringing the capital to a grinding halt with all the misery - economic and otherwise - that that means for hard working people, why not try that and have any misery suffered by themselves? Of course we know the reasons that isn't so tempting a proposition.....

Re CND - exactly, you could count on rationality - but that didn't stop Ruddock, Kent and co from spouting their dangerous nonsense on behalf of the Kremlin did it?



Plenty of issues around not paying tax being a bad protest strategy. If they were to do so, you'd get the usual complaints of "using something (eg roads, NHS ect) but not paying for it!".

Far more effective to concentrate a protest in the capital, where decision making on the issue is centralized. Then, instead of it being a number of a budget sheet in the Treasury, it's on your doorstep.

Sadly, the are greater considerations in the world than your commute.

RE: CND - the issue is not one-sided. Nuclear weapons care not a whit if it's Moscow or London being evaporated. Nor if those being evaporated are plotting global domination or just trying to get to work. It's not 1989 anymore.


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 47
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:45:40 PM   
jagsdomain

 

Posts: 183
Joined: 7/4/2019
Status: offline
Yep

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 48
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:49:19 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

Not a clue, but very likely much lower than the percentages today. Not everyone needs a degree and my electrician and tile guy make a tidy income. My parents did not graduate from high school, but they did OK. But they worked from a very young age. But I am not clear to the gist of your question here?


Just curious.

I have found that there's a certain aversion to higher education amongst some groups of American's that I've known.

Just because a degree is not needed does not mean it has no value.

Only has value if the teaching leads to students learning critical thought as opposed to rote skills. Most Community colleges fail on this one.

I am a big proponent of education just for the sake of education :)

Irish background...as I mentioned before my parents did not get high school degrees. I got lucky, went to a very good high school and a pretty good college. Education is very important to my wife and I - probably accounts for 80% of our charitable giving.

quote:

I will apologize in advance for my sloppy dyslexic typing.

I'm not sure how this thread got side tracked into a climate debate when all I was doing was lamenting the fragility of the Millenial psyche.

I appreciate the response from Obvert who stayed on topic.

To MM I have this to say and please bear with me as explaining where I come from and what positions I take requires some back story.

[edit for brevity]

You, yourself, are proving this to be true MM.

For a very, very long time the 'consensus of prevailing wisdom of the cabal' was that the earth was flat and the center of the universe.
This alone, should be adequate warning to use all to be willing to question 'accepted prevailing wisdom'.


A few thoughts based on this:

- The comparison between quantum physics and climate change is tenuous at best, given we have far, far much more direct evidence of climate change compared to the overall theoretical nature of quantum physics.

- and yet, there are still people who persist that the world is indeed flat, despite the evidence to the contrary. Climate change deniers have joined that group.


quote:

Now, as to the subject of so called Global Warming aka Climate change I approach it a healthy dose of scepticism. There is NO global consensus among scientists.
There is a consensus amongst those entrenched in Big Science with political agendas. The majority of the 'consensus' lies with UN funded scientists pursuing political agenda resulting it receiving a healthy dose of that scepticism.
There are a plethora of scientists planet wide, all with strong credentials, that have no qualms over calling out those who side with the 'consensus'.


Untrue. See above article I posted - this examines just why there is such a consensus on the topic.

The consensus is not down to the machinations of "big science" - if there was such a force able to comply such adherence to the "party line" over such a diverse body of scientists and academics, then we'd have bigger concerns.

No, it's the result of examination of the evidence, even if it is more comforting to think of it as being down to a vague, mysterious plot by "big science".

quote:

The downsides are largely cost and economic realities. As I posted before I do what I can when it comes to being 'green'. That said, we built a detached garage over the last year - which a true 'Greenie' would object to as a waste of resources. But we were required to put in all electrical outlets on separate circuits to enable safe electric car charging in the future (or I guess present). This added quite a bit of infrastructure which I will never use. I still drive my reasonably fuel efficient 1988 Saab 900. It is not getting swapped for an electric car (and it is a stick which makes it much more fun to drive than most of what is being produced today).

Over-regulating the world is not going to usher in a new green age. Companies and people will make decisions based on the data they have to hand. I have solar panels on my house and garage. I have almost completely converted to LED lighting, but in a few fixtures it just does not work, so thank you big govt for regulating some incandescent light bulbs out of existence. There was ice outside this morning but my heating is set to 60 degrees F. I can put on a sweater.

Live and let live I say.

And anyone who thinks a country will unilaterlly decide to take the high road and ban things while other countries do not, is being naive. Visit China if you don't believe me.


Regulation is needed as elsewise nothing will be done. There is plenty of precedent for this - it is worth reading into why there is an Environmental Protection Agency in the first place (short summary - companies like to make profits by dumping waste).

The "China does worse" argument is a hollow one. The international community permits it. The Chinese disregard for the environment is only going to be stopped when the international community is willing to make a stand. That is going to happen when international leaders know that they have the domestic support to do so.

Hollow in your opinion. I will disagree. China and other countries need to be tied down by treaties and inspections. To think that the US or Scandi putting in policies on a unilateral basis is going to somehow influence China is beyond naive. You can add a visit to India to the list for countries that have complete disregard for the environment. And when debating you may want to contemplate a different 'tone' to your posts. You might not agree with my positions, but to call them 'hollow' really doesn't help your cause or credibility.


So, stopping Chinese disregard for the environment starts at home :)




(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 49
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 1:55:08 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 40511
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Sadly, the are greater considerations in the world than your commute.

warspite1

Not for the first time I've tried to have a sensible grown up debate with you but, not for the first time you bring the discussion crashing down with a statement of such mind blowing stupidity, there is simply nothing more to be said. How very dare you even suggest such an absurd notion.




































_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 50
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 2:01:51 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 19744
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
I'd rather a discussion with an openminded, polite comrade who isn't dismissive and contemptuous of those he disagrees with.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 51
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 2:08:40 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7076
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'd rather a discussion with an openminded, polite comrade who isn't dismissive and contemptuous of those he disagrees with.


Was hoping for the same, but appears to have been in vain.

MM your retorts are wavering on the line of insulting and offensive.

The poor dumb country bumpkin dismissive of intellectualism sterotyping is particularly offensive.

Keep it up and this debate will likely get shut down with a lock.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 52
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 3:20:47 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2400
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
I'd make a comment about who are the snowflakes now, but that might hit too close to home.

quote:

I'd rather a discussion with an openminded, polite comrade who isn't dismissive and contemptuous of those he disagrees with.


quote:

Was hoping for the same, but appears to have been in vain.

MM your retorts are wavering on the line of insulting and offensive.

The poor dumb country bumpkin dismissive of intellectualism sterotyping is particularly offensive.

Keep it up and this debate will likely get shut down with a lock.


You have both made your points.

My mind is open, so please present the evidence for your respective positions

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 53
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 3:41:50 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online
MM - if your mind is open please reply to my responses to you. You brought up background and education - I have answered but have not seen any responses to those.

You do seem to cherry pick what you decide to respond to. Your call.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 54
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 4:05:12 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2400
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

MM - if your mind is open please reply to my responses to you. You brought up background and education - I have answered but have not seen any responses to those.

You do seem to cherry pick what you decide to respond to. Your call.


I asked those questions as a very crude proxy for educational level and socio-economic status.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 55
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 4:06:52 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 19744
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I'd make a comment about who are the snowflakes now, but that might hit too close to home.
...
My mind is open, so please present the evidence for your respective positions


A good example of the evidence proving the assertion isn't true.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 56
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 4:14:20 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online
BA in Economics and Finance asshole. And a minor in International politics? You?

I retired at 50 because my economic status is quite good.

I have 4 rescue dogs.

Only one wife.

You really need to up your game. Making assumptions about others without facts will limit your career.

Get the f over yourself. It will help your overall life.

Sanctimonious Ahole.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 57
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 4:27:45 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online
Oh - and just to add sauce to the mix. You seem to think you are better educated than the rest of us. But unless you went to an Ivy, Oxford, Cambridge or moral equivalent that is not so. At least on paper. But education it is what you put into it, not the heading on the paper.

Enuff said?

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 58
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 4:40:24 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 18056
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
Interesting discussion(s). I think I've found a new home!

P.S. Not (necessarily) this thread but definitely this forum & folks!

P.S.S. Well, I guess that is if you'll have me.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 11/2/2019 4:42:25 PM >


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 59
RE: OT: The End is Near........ - 11/2/2019 4:47:55 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 493
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: online
Sweet Home Alabama.....

If you want to see her sister go to Fall River, RI. A couple of PTs there as well. Maybe a DD. Not sure if they have a sub.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: OT: The End is Near........ Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.185