Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Climate Scientologists have a plan
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

slonocode wrote:
No silly. What you describe only makes those selling credits rich. The other stuff is just the smoke that those selling credits have blown up your ass.


You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.
_________________
He who calls for full employment calls for war!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
slonocode
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 273

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
slonocode wrote:
No silly. What you describe only makes those selling credits rich. The other stuff is just the smoke that those selling credits have blown up your ass.


You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.


No I meant what I said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 18294

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
you mean like, say, a market based carbon trading scheme
No. No schemes need to be involved, especially really, really stupid ones.
_________________
Don't even pause and ask them why. Turn around and say goodbye.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1609
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
Nobody runs away from you, mcgruff; they ignore you, like one ignores the babbling of a mentally handicapped child in an elevator or waiting room.


No you keep running away. Happens time and time again. You'll suddenly realise you're way out your depth, seize on some spurious point of your own invention, get angry when that doesn't get you anywhere, and then flounce off claiming everybody else (!) is stupid. The last one was a bit of a classic. The "evidence" you grabbed off wikipedia with a ten-minute google in fact contradicted your own position. Did you acknowledge your error? No. You didn't learn anything at all. You just ran off in a storm of abuse and impotent rage which didn't do as much to hide your embarrassment as you think.

And now you complain about harassment... It's always the same story with climate isn't it? Bigots affect to be harassed and victimised by "witch hunts" whenever anyone dares to challenge their bigotry and ignorance. It's so damned rude to insist that scientific discussions be rational and evidence-led, so awfully unfair to expect them to learn anything, right?

Your the one who ran away the last time we talked, after ineffectually denying the existence of an obvious temperature plateau at the peak of the current interglacial. You even made a complete ass of yourself by posting a graph which showed it clearly. :lol:

But this is the bottom line: here's you, shouting I winned! I winned! Only I teh Scyents!. The sooner you start to see yourself in a realistic light, the sooner people will stop laughing at you behind your back and crossing the street to avoid you.
_________________
patrix_neo wrote:
The human thought: I cannot win.
The ratbrain in me : I can only go forward and that's it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1609
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

slonocode wrote:
sugar wrote:
pjp wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
At least people are thinking about possible actions, though. That's better than running around in labor, witch-finding "deniers".
++

The focus really needs to be on reasonable solutions that don't incur certain economic doom (or destruction of the ecosystem).


you mean like, say, a market based carbon trading scheme that will reduce emissions over time, as well as a focus on improving and implementing renewable technologies?


No silly. What you describe only makes those selling credits rich. The other stuff is just the smoke that those selling credits have blown up your ass.

No, no. mcgruff they scyents boy already told us the solution: stop burning all carbon now! That's all that needs to be said, and all that needs to be done. Problem solved.
_________________
patrix_neo wrote:
The human thought: I cannot win.
The ratbrain in me : I can only go forward and that's it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Your the one who ran away the last time we talked, after ineffectually denying the existence of an obvious temperature plateau at the peak of the current interglacial.


What actually happened was that you were unaware of current thinking that our present interglacial is likely to be longer than the last one. And the one before that. And the one before that too. If you go back half a million years, we find an interglacial period which lasted much longer than the previous three, and celestial mechanics suggest this is a much better match with present conditions.

Understanding this would have required some depth of knowledge about the subject, something you can't get with a ten minute session on google and wikipedia. I'm afraid these climate discussions will continue to be traumatic for you until you make a proper effort to learn about the issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
No, no. mcgruff they scyents boy already told us the solution: stop burning all carbon now!


Actually: "stop burning carbon just as soon as we can".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1609
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
No, no. mcgruff they scyents boy already told us the solution: stop burning all carbon now!


Actually: "stop burning carbon just as soon as we can".

Actually, that's what you revised it to after being heckled for saying "stop all burning of carbon now" a few times. Nevertheless, "as soon as we can" is about as useful as tits on a bull. That's a level of detail inadequate for a trip to the corner store, never mind a global effort to mitigate climate change. It's also woefully incomplete, excluding potential courses of action such as the one discussed here.
_________________
patrix_neo wrote:
The human thought: I cannot win.
The ratbrain in me : I can only go forward and that's it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Actually, that's what you revised it to after being heckled for saying "stop all burning of carbon now" a few times.


No that's what I've always said. You like to argue with imaginary caricatures of other people, that's the fact of the matter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1609
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
Your the one who ran away the last time we talked, after ineffectually denying the existence of an obvious temperature plateau at the peak of the current interglacial.


What actually happened was that you were unaware of current thinking that our present interglacial is likely to be longer than the last one. And the one before that. And the one before that too. If you go back half a million years, we find an interglacial period which lasted much longer than the previous three, and celestial mechanics suggest this is a much better match with present conditions.

Understanding this would have required some depth of knowledge about the subject, something you can't get with a ten minute session on google and wikipedia. I'm afraid these climate discussions will continue to be traumatic for you until you make a proper effort to learn about the issues.

That's not what happened at all. What happened was that I pointed out the disparity between the shape of the present interglacial maximum and the others of this ice age. I did this to suggest that it could even be true that anthropogenic warming is delaying to onset of glacial cooling. In desperation (or stupidity), you found something completely irrelevant talking about the overall duration of the interglacial periods, which has nothing to do with the duration of interglacial maxima (which have historically all been rather precipitous apexes, and not at all like the long, drawn-out plateau we are currently experiencing). At that point, after looking at several graphs and being forced to acknowledge your complete lack of awareness of the flat shape of the present interglacial maximum, you mumbled and shuffled away to other topics. That's what happened.

However, I do realize your version of reality is more like this.
_________________
patrix_neo wrote:
The human thought: I cannot win.
The ratbrain in me : I can only go forward and that's it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1609
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
Actually, that's what you revised it to after being heckled for saying "stop all burning of carbon now" a few times.


No that's what I've always said. You like to argue with imaginary caricatures of other people, that's the fact of the matter.

... said Captain Kneejerk Strawman. :roll:
_________________
patrix_neo wrote:
The human thought: I cannot win.
The ratbrain in me : I can only go forward and that's it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
sugar wrote:
you mean like, say, a market based carbon trading scheme
No. No schemes need to be involved, especially really, really stupid ones.


So, you're advocating a 'do nothing' approach?

What exactly is the position you're defending?
_________________
He who calls for full employment calls for war!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
That's not what happened at all.


You were trying to argue that AGW, and its effects on biodiversity, is insignificant compared to glacial cycles. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even allowing a generous term of existence for our species, biodiversity is unlikely to recover for the whole of the rest of human history.

Bizarrely, you also started to claim that AGW will prolong the current interglacial, which is true, but it does rather contradict your previous claim that the glacial/interglacial cycle is more powerful.

Note that it is not possible to perceive any anthropogenic trends in your graph, a historical record dealing in periods of tens of thousands of years (!). The evidence for a longer interglacial, similar to the one half a million years ago is in the Archer 2005 paper I linked to earlier in the thread. His argument is based on celestial mechanics, not wikipedia graphs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 18294

PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
pjp wrote:
sugar wrote:
you mean like, say, a market based carbon trading scheme
No. No schemes need to be involved, especially really, really stupid ones.


So, you're advocating a 'do nothing' approach?

What exactly is the position you're defending?
As long as it isn't economically crippling or likely to make the situation worse, I'm interested.

I'd also support elimination of existing programs & taxes, which coukd then be used to fund research & implementation projects. A sunset must be included.

For example, a "space race" for alternative energy solutions. National security & economic interests justify the effort, in my opinion.
_________________
Don't even pause and ask them why. Turn around and say goodbye.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1609
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
That's not what happened at all.


You were trying to argue that AGW, and its effects on biodiversity, is insignificant compared to glacial cycles. Nothing could be further from the truth.

No, Captain Strawman. I said that the cooling expected at the end of the current interglacial is a far greater threat to humanity than AGW. The expected temperature change is far greater, and more importantly, in the direction of death (cold: absence of energy) as opposed to the direction of life (warm: abundance of terrestrial life, as the fossil record shows).

mcgruff wrote:
Even allowing a generous term of existence for our species, biodiversity is unlikely to recover for the whole of the rest of human history.

So what? While unfortunate, in a Greenhouse Earth scenario, terrestrial life will remain abundant (probably even more abundant than it is now). While problematic for individual species unable to adapt, I believe man can adapt. Moreover, this is preferable to trying to live on a ball of ice where there is nothing to eat and being reduced to a few patches of inhabitable land (like we were during the last glacial period, as the fossil record shows).

mcgruff wrote:
Bizarrely, you also started to claim that AGW will prolong the current interglacial, which is true, but it does rather contradict your previous claim that the glacial/interglacial cycle is more powerful.

You are confused, and these are more strawmen. I never said it was "more powerful"; I said it would have a larger impact. Also, I didn't say it "will" prolong the current interglacial; I said it "might be" prolonging it.

mcgruff wrote:
Note that it is not possible to perceive any anthropogenic trends in your graph, a historical record dealing in periods of tens of thousands of years (!). The evidence for a longer interglacial, similar to the one half a million years ago is in the Archer 2005 paper I linked to earlier in the thread. His argument is based on celestial mechanics, not wikipedia graphs.

The graph you linked to clearly shows the plateau I referred to, despite you apparently presenting it as evidence to the contrary.

I think there is something broken inside your head, which makes unable to think clearly. This may be why you are constantly knee-jerking and resorting to strawmen; it's like when a computer can't process something and it just spits out the "default". Think, man... think! Use the brain you were born with.

Also, you are derailing yet another thread here with your antics. Why not have an intelligent discussion about potential measures for mitigating AGW, instead of making an asshat of yourself once again? Why are you compulsively, obsessively unable to do this? Why?
_________________
patrix_neo wrote:
The human thought: I cannot win.
The ratbrain in me : I can only go forward and that's it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
sugar wrote:
pjp wrote:
sugar wrote:
you mean like, say, a market based carbon trading scheme
No. No schemes need to be involved, especially really, really stupid ones.


So, you're advocating a 'do nothing' approach?

What exactly is the position you're defending?
As long as it isn't economically crippling or likely to make the situation worse, I'm interested.

I'd also support elimination of existing programs & taxes, which coukd then be used to fund research & implementation projects. A sunset must be included.

For example, a "space race" for alternative energy solutions. National security & economic interests justify the effort, in my opinion.


Is there something specific about existing programs and taxes that you don't like?
_________________
He who calls for full employment calls for war!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 1053
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
Is there something specific about existing programs and taxes that you don't like?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

No sugar, everything runs perfectly!
_________________
"You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" ~ Dorothy Parker
2020 is the year of the Linux Desktop!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
(warm: abundance of terrestrial life, as the fossil record shows).


How many times do you have to be told before it penetrates your thick skull: warming is going to devastate life on earth with a mass extinction of around one third of all species, quite likely more. That's not all: there will be an even greater loss of genetic diversity within surviving species, severely curtailing their long-term ability to survive future threats, as well as their ability to evolve into new species. In time, biodiversity will recover but that could take 50 million years, a period very likely much longer than the entire lifespan of our species.

BoneKracker wrote:
mcgruff wrote:
Note that it is not possible to perceive any anthropogenic trends in your graph, a historical record dealing in periods of tens of thousands of years (!). The evidence for a longer interglacial, similar to the one half a million years ago is in the Archer 2005 paper I linked to earlier in the thread. His argument is based on celestial mechanics, not wikipedia graphs.

The graph you linked to clearly shows the plateau I referred to, despite you apparently presenting it as evidence to the contrary.


When did your plateau begin...?

BoneKracker wrote:
I think there is something broken inside your head


I think every time someone points out an inconsistency in your argument of which you were not aware you panic, wave your arms around and scream "strawman!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 1053
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
I think


I doubt this claim.


mcgruff wrote:
every time someone points out an inconsistency in your argument of which you were not aware you panic, wave your arms around and scream "strawman!"


I have yet to see that. What I have seen is BK pointing out "strawman" on occasion when you lot pull one out. If he were to call it every time you pulled it, the totality of his posts would be "STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN STRAWMAN " as you apparently drag a strawman with you to every argument.

I don't fault you for that, so don't feel offended. If my entire philosophy were based upon the same nonsense yours appears to be, I'd try the deflect and attack strategy too. Thankfully I make my opinions conform to reality instead of trying to redefine reality to conform to my opinions.
_________________
"You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" ~ Dorothy Parker
2020 is the year of the Linux Desktop!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
If my entire philosophy were based upon the same nonsense yours appears to be, I'd try the deflect and attack strategy too.


There is philosophy on the islands...? I don't know. Wondering "where does spam come from?" doesn't really count as philosophy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 18294

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
sugar wrote:
Is there something specific about existing programs and taxes that you don't like?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

No sugar, everything runs perfectly!
++
_________________
Don't even pause and ask them why. Turn around and say goodbye.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Muso wrote:
sugar wrote:
Is there something specific about existing programs and taxes that you don't like?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

No sugar, everything runs perfectly!
++


Is there something specific about existing programs and taxes that you don't like?
_________________
He who calls for full employment calls for war!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 18294

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They are failing, miserably. Two examples. First, and not too likely to induce OTW shitslinging: The War on Drugs. By any (?) measure, it is a failure. Certainly if it were anything else, we'd have tried to change course by now. And another one (higher shitslinging potential), the military industrial complex. I'm a proponent of a strong defense, but the current trend seems unsustainable. And likely everything in between those two.
_________________
Don't even pause and ask them why. Turn around and say goodbye.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
They are failing, miserably. Two examples. First, and not too likely to induce OTW shitslinging: The War on Drugs. By any (?) measure, it is a failure. Certainly if it were anything else, we'd have tried to change course by now. And another one (higher shitslinging potential), the military industrial complex. I'm a proponent of a strong defense, but the current trend seems unsustainable. And likely everything in between those two.


oh.

So, you mean a halt to ALL programs and ALL taxes, not just taxes and programs relating to climate change. Also, when you say 'fund research and implementation projects', you mean technology in general. You're not just restricting your discussion to climate change policy.
_________________
He who calls for full employment calls for war!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 18294

PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All taxes & programs, yes & no. Ideally they would certainly be more effective, and designed to "end." Either so they were no longer needed, or the people they help are not chronically reliant on the programs.

But specifically as it related to the thread (and my originating comment), I support the funding of the "Alternative Energy Race" provided something else is cut (or more realistically, bits of enough other programs). We aren't in a position to keep writing blank checks. Also, the AER program should have measurable goals so that it isn't just a money pit for aimless research.

I was specifically referring to climate change / energy, but that was for the sake of this discussion. In the bigger picture, I do not restrict it to that scope. Also keep in mind that I still think we need to decrease and make our tax system equitable (flat, > "poverty" as an example). Revenue % should be fixed except for catastrophe (sunset provision). Spend wisely.
_________________
Don't even pause and ask them why. Turn around and say goodbye.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum