|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 06/02/2007 : 06:42:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
What question Dave? |
I used the plural - "questions" - because I was talking about all the questions I've asked in this thread.
Your failure to answer any of them obvious means something. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 10:25:10 [Permalink]
|
Kil said:
More evidence that you bastards don't read our weekly Skeptic Summary. Dude's link was my evil pick, two weeks ago…
|
HAHA!
Ummm... I do read the summary. Mostly. Can't say I open every link though.
 |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 19:53:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
What question Dave? This is the last one you asked.
: "Why are you so closed-minded as to call them "true believers?"
Webster defines true believer as:
1 : a person who professes absolute belief in something
2 : a zealous supporter of a particular cause
How am I closed minded using this term?
|
If you are applying it to scientists, you are way wrong. Any scientist that fits your dictionary description will soon find himself driving truck for a living. Or be working for the Discovery Institute, or some other such charlatans. By it's very nature, science must be ready to consider all aspects of a phenomena, however they might influence the research.
Me, I believe in nothing, thereby covering all bases. 
|
Have you seen the documentary I posted in the mmgw thread? The one in which two scientist state that the data is not relevant to their conclusions that man is causing warming?
That sounds lika a "true-believer".
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 20:03:09 [Permalink]
|
Dave said "Did you see that he thinks the consensus assumes there is a problem? Did you know that the problem is a conclusion from the science, and not an assumption?"
Dave are you stating the scientific consensus has come to the conclusion that man is causing a problem? Because this is different from other defenders definition of the consensus.
I honestly believe the defenders of man made global warming should huddle and decide what exactly they are defending as many have differing opinions of what exactly the consensus says. How can anyone defend what they themselves can not define?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 20:10:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave said "Did you see that he thinks the consensus assumes there is a problem? Did you know that the problem is a conclusion from the science, and not an assumption?"
Dave are you stating the scientific consensus has come to the conclusion that man is causing a problem? Because this is different from other defenders definition of the consensus. |
No, it isn't, you're just refusing to read for comprehension.| I honestly believe the defenders of man made global warming should huddle and decide what exactly they are defending as many have differing opinions of what exactly the consensus says. How can anyone defend what they themselves can not define? |
It's been defined, and you ignore the fact that people here are saying the same thing.
Plus, you never did answer my questions. What is it that you have to hide? I suspect it's nothing less than ignorance of the meaning of the topics you choose to bring up, including Michael Griffin's remarks. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 20:23:06 [Permalink]
|
Dave, the head of NASA does not believe one of the three tenets of the consensus.
The first tenet: warming is happening
--little argument from anywhere.
The second tenet: warming caused by man
--much argument in the science community
The third tenet: warming causing great peril
--NASA head argues against it
Will you still doubt when carbon taxes are implemented?
Carbon tax is the goal. What is your explanation of proposed carbon taxes?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 20:54:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave, the head of NASA does not believe one of the three tenets of the consensus.
The first tenet: warming is happening
--little argument from anywhere.
The second tenet: warming caused by man
--much argument in the science community
The third tenet: warming causing great peril
--NASA head argues against it |
Ah! You're saying that because you can't understand and reiterate the consensus position, and because some people argue against the consensus, the people arguing for the consensus can't get their stories straight. I see you're actually no fan of "personal responsibility" when it comes to Internet discussions, choosing to blame everyone else for your failures of comprehension.Will you still doubt when carbon taxes are implemented?
Carbon tax is the goal. What is your explanation of proposed carbon taxes? |
You say that a carbon tax is the goal, but you've presented no evidence of that.
Besides, a carbon tax would benefit me. So would cap-and-trade. The CEO of Duke Energy would prefer the latter. I am undecided as to which would benefit me more, or if some other system would. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 21:11:17 [Permalink]
|
Dave, do you doubt carbon tax is a goal? If so, I can provide evidence.
Of course and existing energy company would like a cap-and-trade system as they are an existing business with existing infrastructure. Cap-and-trade would lower competition.
I do not know what question you want me to answer; please tell me and I will answer.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 21:18:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave, do you doubt carbon tax is a goal? If so, I can provide evidence. |
Do so. You should know the routine by now.| Of course and existing energy company would like a cap-and-trade system as they are an existing business with existing infrastructure. Cap-and-trade would lower competition. |
You can offer up some evidence for that, too.| I do not know what question you want me to answer; please tell me and I will answer. |
All the questions I have asked you in this thread, for starters. There aren't that many of them. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 22:02:28 [Permalink]
|
"As lawmakers on Capitol Hill push for a cap-and-trade system to rein in the nation's greenhouse gas emissions, an unlikely alternative has emerged from an ideologically diverse group of economists and industry leaders: a carbon tax."
http://tinyurl.com/2bxknc
"The European Community continues to evaluate the need for, and effects of, a carbon/energy tax to meet its commitment to reduce CO2 emissions, and similar studies are being done in the U.S."
http://tinyurl.com/38ss3c
"the European Commission proposed a carbon tax"
www.american.edu/ted/eccarbon.htm
"Support for such a "carbon tax" has been growing since the 1992 UN Earth Summit focused international attention on the damage to the environment caused by excessive use of fossil fuels worldwide."
www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol15no4/154finan.htm
It is now clear a carbon tax is a goal.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 22:05:28 [Permalink]
|
Jerome said "Of course and existing energy company would like a cap-and-trade system as they are an existing business with existing infrastructure. Cap-and-trade would lower competition."
Dave said "You can offer up some evidence for that, too."
If one needs evidence that less competition for an existing business is good for that business, one needs to do his own research.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 22:07:27 [Permalink]
|
Dave, I will happily reply to any questions you have. I will not wander about looking for the questions you deem I have not answered. Ask any question you like and I will answer; this is not an easter egg hunt.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 22:19:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Jerome said "Of course and existing energy company would like a cap-and-trade system as they are an existing business with existing infrastructure. Cap-and-trade would lower competition."
Dave said "You can offer up some evidence for that, too."
If one needs evidence that less competition for an existing business is good for that business, one needs to do his own research. |
No, I want evidence that cap-and-trade reduces competition to existing businesses. Or were you trying to insult me? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2007 : 22:28:26 [Permalink]
|
Dave, once the cap and trade system is in place new suppliers of energy would need to buy carbon credits from existing holders of carbon credits. This means that there is an extra cost to initiate competition, thus reducing the ability to compete. In many cases this would lead to a new business paying its existing competition for the right to compete.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
How to talk to global warming deniers...
