Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (9014 total)
67 online now:
jar, PaulK (2 members, 65 visitors)
Newest Member: Ashles
Post Volume: Total: 881,964 Year: 13,712/23,288 Month: 230/412 Week: 17/40 Day: 2/12 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2153
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


(1)
Message 661 of 713 (873024)
03-08-2020 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 659 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:02 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
I'm saying that it can't be politically acted upon only on the word of a "faction";

when one "faction" is science what is the other "faction"? non-science? inbred cousin humpers who believe in magic?

The scientific community's effects are constitutionally required to be controlled by a political process.

which part of the constitution governs science?

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 659 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:02 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 667 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 10:12 PM DrJones* has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 662 of 713 (873025)
03-08-2020 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 654 by glowby
03-01-2020 3:07 AM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
marc9000 writes:

But some people today demand political action against a neighbor or company that's "polluting"

Yes, of course. People have always done that.

Yes and you chopped my sentence in half. Lets look at the entire sentence, you know, the one that caused others here to fly into a rage;

marc9000 writes:

But some people today demand political action against a neighbor or company that's "polluting", but they have to do more than cite science and calculations - they need to show evidence of pollution that is specifically provable as measured by the five human senses. If they can't, then there are political problems.

Now lets try again;

Yes, of course. People have always done that.

But they haven't done it by claiming that the pollution is completely invisible and undetectable by any human senses, that they only know it because a faction's precision instruments tell them that. They have seldom, if ever done that in the past, but there are new political pushes by today's far political left that seeks to circumvent the constitution by allowing the scientific community faction make political demands.

Carbon emissions are crap we've been throwing into the atmosphere for generations, but only recently realized the consequences of doing it. It's the same as other garbage. We have to deal with it: Flush it, take it to the curb or dump, hire a collection service, and easiest of all - not make so much of it. Because we haven't disposed of CO2 properly, it's making problems for the entire planet; ourselves and our neighbors included.

That is the claim of a faction, and, so far, a minority of the population. Other percentages of the population suspect that problems, much more serious than CO2 disposal, (such as economic crashes, including mass starvation and widespread humans freezing to death) could occur if we allow a faction and a minority to destroy human rights, some of them unalienable rights.

Yes, it infringes on our neighbor's liberty if we demand he use a toilet instead of our yards. I suppose it's kind of fun to relieve yourself outdoors and it saves a little on the water bill. But even if his yard is downwind, would you defend his "liberty" from "political action"?

If the "downwind" part is detectable by human senses, then no, not necessarily. But if you'll refer to the list in Message 650, down at about the 75th item, yup, there it is, toilet seats!!!!! Looks like people in Rhode Island won't have much choice but to use their yard in 2030, when their governors command takes effect. An unanticipated problem that only Republicans can foresee?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 654 by glowby, posted 03-01-2020 3:07 AM glowby has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 671 by glowby, posted 03-08-2020 11:56 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 663 of 713 (873026)
03-08-2020 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 655 by Taq
03-02-2020 1:14 PM


Re: another big oil pawn
marc9000 writes:

Yes, the direction it's taking and what is causing it are science and fact. But that's only a very small part of the discussion, the biggest part of the discussion is the uneven placing of the blame on only some humans, and what a few humans in government can do about it.

That's flat out false. You are pushing propaganda that tries to argue it isn't happening at all.

The straw man you built is false, but what I said is not. Questioning the placing of blame, and what humans can do to control the weather and ocean levels, is different than claiming something isn't happening.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 655 by Taq, posted 03-02-2020 1:14 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 678 by Taq, posted 03-12-2020 5:53 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 664 of 713 (873027)
03-08-2020 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 657 by Taq
03-02-2020 1:19 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth
Great. Then let's take those Swedish policies and enact them in the US.

I think a better idea would be to let those who love Swedish policies to move there, and leave the U.S. system like it is. You've said that Swedish people are happy, but there are a lot of happy people in the U.S. too.

Narry a conservative should have a problem with it since they aren't socialist policies, right?

No, not if they aren't constitutional. Sweden and the U.S. both have some socialist tendencies, each has some more than the other. Sweden doesn't have many government programs that the U.S. has, and like many other countries around the world, Sweden benefits from the protection of the U.S. military, without having to pay a dime for it, unlike U.S. taxpayers. Comparing the U.S. to other countries is often an apples to oranges comparison.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 657 by Taq, posted 03-02-2020 1:19 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 666 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-08-2020 10:11 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 679 by Taq, posted 03-12-2020 5:56 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 665 of 713 (873028)
03-08-2020 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 658 by RAZD
03-02-2020 5:58 PM


marc9000 writes:

Here's a partial list of products made from fossil fuels;

And which of them cannot be made from other sources that are not fossil fuels?

None.

From raw materials to consumers hands, there is nothing on that list that isn't completely dependent on fossil fuels in multiple ways.

There is always hydraulics involved in digging in the ground, in making steel, in paving roads and making tires. Everything there will at some point be transported by truck. A lot of steps involved in making those things involves air travel, there is currently nothing on the horizon to power air travel other than fossil fuels.

I see nothing in the news that says we're on the brink of being able to dig without hydraulics, to make tires for electric cars and trucks without fossil fuels, as only two examples. But I'm always willing to learn, can you describe, or link me to, examples of how this will be done, whether economically feasible or not, by 2030? Or is the "Green New Deal" nothing but hot air intended only to appeal to people who have little idea of how the real world actually works?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 658 by RAZD, posted 03-02-2020 5:58 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 670 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-08-2020 10:24 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 677 by RAZD, posted 03-11-2020 2:31 PM marc9000 has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1719
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 666 of 713 (873029)
03-08-2020 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 664 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:53 PM


Can people move from country to country to be comfortable
I remember when I first started hearing that Americans critical of their own country should leave the country and live in another.

The problem is BORDERS ARE NOT OPEN.

But from a human rights and wants point of view, it would make sense to allow the cards in the deck to reshuffle. That is people should be able to move freely so everybody can be comfortable and live harmoniously.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 664 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:53 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 668 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 10:19 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 667 of 713 (873030)
03-08-2020 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 661 by DrJones*
03-08-2020 9:16 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
when one "faction" is science what is the other "faction"?

What other faction? I never claimed there was one. If you're referring to the opposition to the scientific faction, that's not a faction, that's a free people, armed with constitutional rights, and unalienable rights.

which part of the constitution governs science?

The 10th amendment. Science isn't specifically referred to in the constitution, so it's subject to the political process, just like everything else that isn't referred to in the constitution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 661 by DrJones*, posted 03-08-2020 9:16 PM DrJones* has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 669 by DrJones*, posted 03-08-2020 10:19 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 675 by Chiroptera, posted 03-09-2020 8:44 AM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 668 of 713 (873031)
03-08-2020 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 666 by LamarkNewAge
03-08-2020 10:11 PM


Re: Can people move from country to country to be comfortable
I remember when I first started hearing that Americans critical of their own country should leave the country and live in another.

The problem is BORDERS ARE NOT OPEN.

But from a human rights and wants point of view, it would make sense to allow the cards in the deck to reshuffle. That is people should be able to move freely so everybody can be comfortable and live harmoniously.

There are processes that allow Americans to move to other countries, many countries welcome Americans because Americans often contribute positively to countries that they move to. (as one example, it's a lot easier to travel FROM the U.S. TO Canada, than to come from Canada to the U.S.) Those processes do have to be complex and stringent however, the coronavirus should make that obvious.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 666 by LamarkNewAge, posted 03-08-2020 10:11 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2153
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


Message 669 of 713 (873032)
03-08-2020 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 667 by marc9000
03-08-2020 10:12 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
What other faction? I never claimed there was one.

if you're going to claim that science is a faction it only makes sense that those that oppose it are a faction of their own.

that's a free people, armed with constitutional rights, and unalienable rights.

as the saying goes your right to swing your arm ends at the tip of my nose.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 667 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 10:12 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 680 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 6:22 PM DrJones* has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1719
Joined: 12-22-2015


(1)
Message 670 of 713 (873033)
03-08-2020 10:24 PM
Reply to: Message 665 by marc9000
03-08-2020 10:04 PM


Green New Deal possibilities.
I cannot quote but I just looked at 2019 energy by source.

Fossil fuels are 62.7 percent of the energy on the grid. Natural gas 38.4 and coal 23.5

Nuke plants are 19.7

Renewable is 17.5
Wind 7.3
Solar 1.8
Hydro 6.6
Biomas 1.4
Geothermal 0.4

Renewable produce one third of fossil fuels.

So it should be possible to triple them by 2030 and replace fossil fuels.

Very possible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 665 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 10:04 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
glowby
Member
Posts: 64
From: Fox River Grove, IL
Joined: 05-29-2010


(1)
Message 671 of 713 (873034)
03-08-2020 11:56 PM
Reply to: Message 662 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:33 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
But they [people] haven't done it [complain about polluting] by claiming that the pollution is completely invisible and undetectable by any human senses, that they only know it because a faction's precision instruments tell them that.

Yes, indeed they have. Take for example pollution of freshwater sources by toxic chemicals. It's often invisible, odorless, and tasteless. Undetectable except by laboratory testing, and the eventual telltale signs of illness and death in the population. The labs' precision instruments don't subscribe to any "faction". Neither does the science giving evidence to the fact of AGW belong to any faction.

...they need to show evidence of pollution that is specifically provable as measured by the five human senses. If they can't, then there are political problems.

They're only political problems for people who are able to ignore 2 extra human senses. Logic and reason.

That [CO2 pollution] is the claim of a faction, and, so far, a minority of the population.

Those are the facts. No different than the fact that Earth is spinning. If a majority of people insist the Earth is stationery, as their 5 senses tell them, that doesn't change the fact. In any case, the majority of Americans now accept the fact that global warming is caused by the activities of mankind and must be addressed by our government.

Another partial sentence...

...yup, there it is, toilet seats...

Mine is wooden. But I suppose some petroleum distillates were used for the finish, and it's likely that fossil fuels were used in its manufacturing process. But this is a silly straw man argument. No one is proposing to immediately outlaw fossil fuels. Every item on your list can be produced without them anyway, even the toilet seat.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 662 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:33 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 682 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 6:54 PM glowby has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16624
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 672 of 713 (873038)
03-09-2020 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 660 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:07 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
quote:
I just pointed out that they were not related, after you implied that they were

I didn’t imply any such thing. I pointed that the restrictions on wood-burning stoves were about particulate emissions. After you ignorantly rambled about heat emissions and complained that other people didn’t care about the science. I didn’t mention global warming at all.

Obviously you thought that the restrictions on wood burning stoves were supposedly about global warming. And you were ignorant and wrong.

quote:
TDR (Trump Derangement Syndrome) is getting more contagious here than coronavirus in Washington state.

And what has that to do with your scientific ignorance?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 660 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:07 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 683 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:06 PM PaulK has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16624
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 673 of 713 (873039)
03-09-2020 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 659 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:02 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
quote:
The scientific community's effects are constitutionally required to be controlled by a political process

Again we see your totalitarian impulses.

The Tenth Amendment, unfortunately for you, is about the rights of the States and limits on the Federal Government. It does not empower the Federal Government to dictate what scientists study, nor the conclusions they reach.

(Message 667)

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

quote:
The scientific community is very mischievous these days, considering it's largely controlled by atheism and one political party.

By which you mean that science finds truths you want suppressed. Totalitarian for sure.

Edited by PaulK, : Added reference to the message where Marc claims that the 10th Amendment enables political control of science


This message is a reply to:
 Message 659 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:02 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 684 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:10 PM PaulK has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16624
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 674 of 713 (873040)
03-09-2020 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 659 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:02 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
Surprise, surprise when I look at the link, Marc is quote mining again.

quote:
There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

Marc doesn’t say that the first method is utterly rejected, as to the second - the real point of the Amendment is to protect against the tyranny of the majority:

By what means is this object attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression

Political control of science would be a scheme of oppression, exactly what Federalist Paper 10 is against.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 659 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:02 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6916
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


(3)
Message 675 of 713 (873042)
03-09-2020 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 667 by marc9000
03-08-2020 10:12 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
Science isn't specifically referred to in the constitution, so it's subject to the political process, just like everything else that isn't referred to in the constitution.

Does anybody else remember when conservatives claimed to be in favor of limited government?

Edited by Chiroptera, : Typo.


The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. -- Richard Feynman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 667 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 10:12 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 685 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:16 PM Chiroptera has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020