|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 03/06/2007 : 11:38:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
So do you dismiss Claude Allegre and his final conclusion, a man who has dedicated his life's work to the issue, simply for being a French Socialist or is it just because he disagrees with you?
If you can quote anything I've written which suggests or implies that I "dismiss Claude Allegre and his final conclusion," I'll eat my hat. I take Allegre's words more seriously than you do, since you have neglected - in your OP or afterwards - Allegre's actual point. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 11:43:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott...
The consensus of scientists who happen to agree with their pre-held beliefs, that is.
No, Bill, you're wrong again. Your abysmal lack of intellectual ability (or lack of willingness to apply it) is showing again. Here's what is generally meant by the participants in this forum when they use the word "consensus"...
consensus n. A consensual agreement or win-win outcome of collaborative problem-solving and conflict resolution. A consensus implies that debate has taken place, the solution is generally accepted rather than a grudging compromise, and that agreement is deep-rooted enough that it can stand for some time without need to revisit the issue. The consensus among today's climatologists is that there is a human contribution to the current global warming trend. The few dissenters you've mentioned do not change the fact that it is a consensus view.
Now try this, Bill: Since it looks like you're just talking out of your ass again, as is usual for you, here's your chance to show that you actually have a clue. You've made the claim that "man made global warming skepticism on the rise". Demonstrate that to be true. Show us, not by your cherry picked singular examples, but in some statistical way, that global warming skepticism actually is increasing. Show us that there actually is increasing doubt within the scientific community about the existence of global warming or that humans contribute to its cause. (Hint: Your discovering a few more individuals who hold a contrary opinion does not actually indicate that there is any such increase.)
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis...
No dumbass, you are responsible for your own education. I don't care about it in the least.
Or perhaps more poetically stated in another thread...
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis ...
Yes, Bill only a brave few can actually go out and do research on their own. Only us tireless souls can get our arse off the couch and get a library card. Low to we brave souls for our journey is yet long ahead, perilously searching for convincing arguments, data, and actual thoughts. We must think our way out of that paper sack, rather than call it home like so many of our brethren. Must we so work our bones? Can we not take a rest from such toil? No, for to do so would be... intellectual suicide. Stay back, Bill, the road is too difficult for the weak minded. It is best you simply let others do the work for you and merely stand back, clear of dangerous mis-information or yet worse mis-mis-information, aside: I don't think I'll even hint at the mis-mis-mis-information. Shuddering No Bill ahead is too much collating and organizing of facts. You take a rest here on under this rock, and await news from the brave scouts who will take on the arduous task of, thinking. cue scary music.
Here's the link to the other thread, Bill. Now pick up your lazy ass, and carry it over there, and read it for yourself. There are several links posted throughout that thread supporting the idea that a human contribution to the global warming effect is accepted as current scientific consensus.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott...
And then in the next breath you defend Al Gore, a xxxxxxx politician for Pete's sake, as the persecuted martyr for your MMGW cause.
Oh, and HalfMooner hadn't previously mentioned Al Gore in this thread at all, Bill, much less in his next breath in that post to which you were replying. Maybe you're hallucinating again, or more likely you're just being the same lying piece of shit you've always been in these forums. You know you could improve your credibility immeasurably if you'd grow some balls and show some honesty for once. Yeah, I know, pretty slim chance of that, eh? 
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 12:05:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
quote:
I'm not even going to attempt to estimate how many times I've taken out the trash, as it seems somewhat irrelevant here.
You come off as some environmentalist who is trying to save the planet by rambling on and on on some backwoods website about a boarder line fairytale while all along our landfills are being stuffed full of who knows what right before our vary eyes and there you are taking out your trash to curb for the last 30+ years. I am an environmentalist, but I choose to address real and verifiable issues rather then chasing ghosts.
quote:
I don't think Al Gore's a martyr in the least. In fact, I think he's kicking ass on this issue. Gore was told long ago by political advisers to avoid this issue, because people didn't care. Thankfully, he did care enough to speak out anyway. Now GW's actually a positive issue for him. That's a big turn-around, one that his moral courage made happen.
In Al Gore's movie we are presented as fact that because of MMGW the ice-caps are melting and this will raise the ocean level and create all kinds of havoc for the world. You trumpet Al Gore, a career politician, as the savior of the planet and a champion of science. I present a piece from a professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography, and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University, who says that there is no way we could ever know the average temp of the ice caps as the proper equipment to perform this task in not in place. Not only that but the limited information they do get from the region actually shows that it is cooling.
quote:
I don't dismiss Claude Allegre or his credentials, but I do point out that his new opinion on global warming is contrary to the general scientific consensus.
Suit yourself, but don't forget that his resume on the subject far and exceeds most of those who came to this "general" scientific consensus.
quote:
I think his opinion is unlikely to be correct.
Just because 2 out of 3 less qualified scientists say so?
quote:
You seem to be dismissing a far, far larger mass of scientific opinion than I have, so any argument based upon authority (essentially a weak to fallacious argument) would seem to work against you, Bill.
Let's see here, I am dismissing Al Gore while you are dismissing Claude Allegre. (Hmm)
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 03/06/2007 13:44:34 |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 12:15:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
Gotta check out Conservapedis's take on this: (http://www.conservapedia.com/Global_warming):
I found this snipet interesting:
Al Gore, Vice President under President Clinton from 1992 to 2000, is a high profile advocate of the full global warming theory. Promoters of this theory, including many prominent scientists, call for international treaties, like one proposed in Kyoto, Japan, to limit carbon emissions using a combination of conservation and technological innovation.
The theory is widely accepted within the scientific community despite a lack of any conclusive evidence,
Really???
though that is not to say there is no evidence at all
Sounds like a far cry from the slam dunk, case closed, power point presentation that Gore likes to preach to his choir.
Damn straight! If you can't trust Conservapedia's take on a scientific issue, you can't trust ANY right wing religious fundamentalist's take on a scientific issue. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 12:22:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
And why is it you can't answer without becoming insulting?
quote:
Neurosis
No dumbass
quote:
Dude
C'mon guys... Billy is a political operative. He's like a less intelligent, less articulate, MAnn Coultergeist.
quote:
Gee Mack
or more likely you're just being the same lying piece of shit you've always been in these forums.
I think you will see the maturity level I am dealing with here is somewhat lax to say the least. You are right, though, I should take the higher road and not stoop to their level.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 03/06/2007 13:41:44 |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 12:25:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
Damn straight! If you can't trust Conservapedia's take on a scientific issue, you can't trust ANY right wing religious fundamentalist's take on a scientific issue.
No doubt. Might as well throw French Socialists in there while we are at it. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 12:45:34 [Permalink]
|
Okay, Bill. I finally get it. You are just having fun with us.
I wrote: "You seem to be dismissing a far, far larger mass of scientific opinion than I have, so any argument based upon authority (essentially a weak to fallacious argument) would seem to work against you, Bill."
You "answered": "Let's see here, I am dismissing Al Gore while you are dismissing Claude Allegre. (Hmm)"
Now, that's funny!
Another Bill Funny: Using Conservapedia as a source for anything but laughs.
Now I know you are kidding us. Nobody's that sack-of-hammers dumb!
Go to Top of Page |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 13:40:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
If you can quote anything I've written which suggests or implies that I "dismiss Claude Allegre and his final conclusion," I'll eat my hat.
I see your point, Dave. Just because it appeared to me that you were mocking his French Socialist back ground and my agreement with a French Socialist that does mean that you dismiss his final conclusion.
quote:
I take Allegre's words more seriously than you do, since you have neglected - in your OP or afterwards - Allegre's actual point.
I take his words seriously. What I neglect or reject is the justifying of means for the desired end result.
The world would be better off, Dr. Allegre believes, if these "denouncers" became less political and more practical, by proposing practical solutions to head off the dangers they see, such as developing technologies to sequester C02.
I would agree with Dr. Allegre here and I assume you would to.
His dream, he says, is to see "ecology become the engine of economic development and not an artificial obstacle that creates fear."
I agree with the good Dr. here as well which is where you and I might separate. I don't have any problem looking for ways to limit CO2. What I don't like is fear mongering the folks (which people get rich off of) to get this agenda pushed through.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 14:10:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack
quote:
There are several links posted throughout that thread supporting the idea that a human contribution to the global warming effect is accepted as current scientific consensus.
List any of their evidence.
quote:
Oh, and HalfMooner hadn't previously mentioned Al Gore in this thread at all, Bill,
I never said that he did mention AG, in this thread.
quote:
much less in his next breath in that post to which you were replying.
Maybe if I would have said, "on the other hand" you would not have been so confused. See I did not lie. You were just confused.
quote:
Maybe you're hallucinating again, or more likely you're just being the same lying piece of shit you've always been in these forums. You know you could improve your credibility immeasurably if you'd grow some balls and show some honesty for once. Yeah, I know, pretty slim chance of that, eh?
And you could improve your credibility by stopping to use the word liar so loosely. When someone makes a mistake they were not lying. When you don't understand what someone was saying to you that does not mean they are a liar. Grow up, man.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 14:23:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
I see your point, Dave. Just because it appeared to me that you were mocking his French Socialist back ground and my agreement with a French Socialist that does mean that you dismiss his final conclusion.
The only thing I was making fun of is your use of a French Socialist for your own political ends.quote:
I take his words seriously.
But you still haven't quoted the important part of what he had to say.quote:
What I neglect or reject is the justifying of means for the desired end result.
The only means which don't need justification for any end result are means that are without cost. What you're objecting to is a particular justification of a specific means to an end.quote:
The world would be better off, Dr. Allegre believes, if these "denouncers" became less political and more practical, by proposing practical solutions to head off the dangers they see, such as developing technologies to sequester C02.
I would agree with Dr. Allegre here and I assume you would to.
I'm not sure. I don't know what "denouncers" he's talking about. There are plenty of MMGW activists who are proposing solutions and researching their relatives merits (including practicality).quote:
His dream, he says, is to see "ecology become the engine of economic development and not an artificial obstacle that creates fear."I agree with the good Dr. here as well which is where you and I might separate. I don't have any problem looking for ways to limit CO2. What I don't like is fear mongering the folks (which people get rich off of) to get this agenda pushed through.
Who is getting rich by spreading the word about how current global warming is probably due to human activities? An H3 costs a hell of a lot more than a Prius, and large factories stand to make more money if carbon limits never go into effect. Are you trying to say that the MMGW "agenda" is being pushed by the makers of pollution-scrubbing equipment? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 15:01:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
We will be using your own personal percentages, I'm rather sure.
No. We simply take into account all of the known possible religions and then put that number under 1. There are alot but let's say there are 100 (a miniscule estimate) and ignore all possible variations and denominations. Then you have a 1% chance of going to heaven. Guess you don't know about math either.
quote:
There are no massive amounts of evidence for MMGW in the other thread, is there? That would explain why you are getting so hot under the collar.
There is quite a bit, but I really am more concerned with why it matters to have this discussion. Also, I am not hot under the collar at all. You are a comic to me at this point. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 15:05:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Yet you will dismiss Claude Allegre, a man with a longer list of scientific credentials then you have posts on this forum, without even so much as an explanation as to why you, with no scientific credentials, have rejected him.
You do this with ALL of the other scientist excluding the ones in the minority that agree with your absurd positions.
quote:
I found this snipet interesting:
Al Gore, Vice President under President Clinton from 1992 to 2000, is a high profile advocate of the full global warming theory. Promoters of this theory, including many prominent scientists, call for international treaties, like one proposed in Kyoto, Japan, to limit carbon emissions using a combination of conservation and technological innovation.
The theory is widely accepted within the scientific community despite a lack of any conclusive evidence,
Really???
though that is not to say there is no evidence at all
Sounds like a far cry from the slam dunk, case closed, power point presentation that Gore likes to preach to his choir.
Only you would trust conservapedia and not see the joke  . |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 17:09:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Bill Scott:
Suit yourself, but don't forget that his resume on the subject far and exceeds most of those who came to this "general" scientific consensus.
So, lets see if I have this right. Bill's experts are really really good, even though they are in the vast minority. Our experts (the consensus) are not fit be in the same room or breath the same air as Bill's experts. Not most of them anyhow. One of Bill's experts recanted. Many now in the consensus also recanted, but since Bill's experts are superior in every way to our experts (the consensus) it doesn't matter if some of our experts recanted and are now convinced about what Bill's experts are skeptical of because Bill's experts are, well, higher quality experts.
quote:
Bill Scott:
So when Claude Allegre, one of France's leading socialists…
Claude Allegre, is one of France's leading socialists and among her most celebrated scientists…
I next referenced Claude Allegre, one of France's leading socialists…
How can you be absolutely sure about the quality of an expert in this case? Well, scientific credentials are a very good place to start. It doesn't count if the largest number of experts has informed you, and you believe you should share what they are telling you. What you should do is keep your mouth shut because you're just an xxxxxx politician, even if you are only presenting what the experts are saying. They were not of the highest quality or they wouldn't be holding the consensus viewpoint. However, it's kosher to point out over and over that one of your experts happens to be a socialist. I mean, hey, if a socialist can remove himself from the consensus, which happens to be a leftist view of global warming, that says a whole lot about his recantation, doesn't it? It counts as evidence that he is correct, no? Pointing that out isn't the least bit political because that expert really is a high quality superior expert, plus he is a socialist!
That about cover it?
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 19:11:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott...
Maybe if I would have said, "on the other hand" you would not have been so confused. See I did not lie. You were just confused.
[. . .]
And you could improve your credibility by stopping to use the word liar so loosely. When someone makes a mistake they were not lying. When you don't understand what someone was saying to you that does not mean they are a liar.
Well you do lie regularly, Bill. Now it may be that you lie intentionally and are aware of it, in which case calling you a liar is simply an accurate assessment. Or maybe you are not aware of it, which means you're mentally ill. On that point I've been giving your mental health the benefit of the doubt... on that point. 
Because your lying borders on pathological, it does become difficult to determine at any moment whether you're lying again or if you're just being a piss poor communicator. Unfortunately, communicating poorly is also something you do regularly. In either case, the responsibility for your problems is yours. But thanks for explaining that this was just another case of you not being able to communicate effectively.
Now how about you finally get around to supporting your assertion which forms the basis for this thread. Apparently you believe "man made global warming skepticism is on the rise". Why don't you demonstrate that to be true. Give us some evidence that global warming skepticism is actually increasing. Show us that there is increasing doubt within the scientific community about the existence of global warming or that humans contribute to its cause. (Unless of course your title for this thread is just another example of your shitty communication skills.)
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 19:13:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
The only thing I was making fun of is your use of a French Socialist for your own political ends.
It is rather amazing when you think about it, a Socialist French decorated scientist and myself in very much total agreement that is.
quote:
But you still haven't quoted the important part of what he had to say.
Please quote it for me then.
quote:
The only means which don't need justification for any end result are means that are without cost. What you're objecting to is a particular justification of a specific means to an end.
OK, then I'll rephrase it, Stop pushing this unproven theory off as a slam dunk, not open for debate, case closed, discussion when one of the leading men in the field, a man who helped pioneer the MMGW theory over two decades ago, ends up recanting his position and calling the MMGW theory “over-hyped.”
quote:
I'm not sure. I don't know what "denouncers" he's talking about. There are plenty of MMGW activists who are proposing solutions and researching their relatives merits (including practicality).
When they come up with something that works and is affordable then I'll have no problem switching over to the new product, what ever it may be.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Man Made Global Warming skepticism on the rise
