About me: If I had my way I'd buy a few acres of land and an old tractor. I'd drive the old tractor around the land and passers-by would stop to ask me what kind of crop I was farming. "Crop?" I'd say, "Crops are work, I'm planting ideas."
Okay, nothing cracked. There's one battery I'm not too keen to hook the booster cables up to though. Also, the neighbour-boy seems to be delving into psychedelics and guns. I'm thinking I should teach him to write...
But that's the whole deal, innit? Climate is global, weather is local. Unless we really go all Cretaceous after awhile.
No, or maybe yes. let's go with "could be."
The weather being local is the main problem. Hell, I live in Manitoba. A warmer climate means my heating bills go down and my yearly span of finding excuses to pee outside expands. To my urban friends, the warmer climate looks pretty good. The weather is getting better.
Okay, the lighter drawer is empty, and the toaster seems to have some tilt/safety mechanism on it. Hang on a minute. Okay, I found a match. As long as I never let this cigarette go out, it'll be okay.
To my rural friends it mean less hay, lower grain yields, and less water for their livestock though.
Intersstingly, my rural friends are heavily invested in denialism, while my urban friends are concerned.
That split matches an understanding of the commons more closely than it matches the personal interests of those involved.
Piscator was on the right track, bringing in ocean circulation and albedo. Which gets me back to my advocacy of volcanoes.
That's kind of like advocating for zombies though...
piscator wrote:and the time thing is important too, because it's not just about us, and our new cars, and the weather today, and our 5-year marketing plans- it has a lot more to do with generations coming along behind us
See i have a problem with that from the outset. It is about us. Fuck it, it's all about me. Me, Damn it! Fuck the rest of you. I got mine and I'm keeping it. What are you, the people in fucking grey? Jesus, you're after my snowmobile aren't you? You fuckers want to take away my right to get drunk and drive my sled at eighty miles an hour. I'll bet you'd even stop me from clubbing a moose, wouldn't you? Well, fuck you, I've eaten every one of those moose and seal meat tastes just like pussy. Fuckin' seals, out there polluting the ice and eating our cod, and I don't mean that in a bad way...well, you know.
The preceding rant was brought to you by the Redneck Friends of Reverend Blair.
Sorry, that's what we're up against. I do count people like that among my friends. Hell, I've eaten moose roasts they've given me. And taken their sleds out for a spin or two. It doesn't change the fact that the are fun to drink beer with.
It is very much about us though. They know my viewpoint, and I know theirs and I've never turned down a moose roast. Seal meat tastes like oily dog vomit though...just sayin', and don't ask.
Here's the deal though, this isn't about future generations. They told us that back in the 1980's. Since then we've seen huge changes due to global warming and come to recognize some of the past changes. We've also bred and raised two more generations. I'm not sure which of those generations anybody here is from, but the future is pretty much jamming things up your ass right now, and not in a good way.
And now I have to leave due to personal obligations and shit.
If somebody could remind me to finish this tomorrow, I'd appreciate it.
About me: If I had my way I'd buy a few acres of land and an old tractor. I'd drive the old tractor around the land and passers-by would stop to ask me what kind of crop I was farming. "Crop?" I'd say, "Crops are work, I'm planting ideas."
I was saying that global warming is no longer about future generations. It likely is for you baby boomers and older people. It might be for that weird little half-generation that followed, of which I'm a member. For the children of the baby boomers on down though, it is very much about them. We've already seen some pretty drastic changes, and we're seeing more changes more quickly all of the time. It's not terribly obvious where most of us live yet, and won't be for a while. It will be by 2050 though, and from the children of the boomers on down, they can expect to have to live through some pretty tough times because of global warming. More than that, they can expect to face those tough times with very few resources, because the generations before them will have pretty much trashed the place. That's two generations of people who are young adults right now though, and they will be affected directly in their lifetimes.
Their best hope is to establish the idea of the commons as a political force as quickly as possible. If there is a commons, then they can protect it. The political forces in power right now have no interest in a commons though. In fact, they have a vested interest in destroying the parts of a collective commons that still remain. So those in line to inherit this mess need to become politically active quickly enough to counter the worst instincts their elders.
Drought in China caused by climate change: experts
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2010-03-28 20:24
BEIJING - Meteorologists have attributed the once-in-a-century drought parching southwest China to climate change.
The drought has left more than 18 million residents and 11.7 million head of livestock suffering drinking-water shortages over a region encompassing the southwestern provinces of Yunnan, Guizhou, Sichuan, the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and the municipality of Chongqing, data from the Ministry of Civil Affairs showed.
"The direct reason for the drought is light rain and high temperatures," Ren Fuming, a leading expert at China's National Climate Center, told the latest edition of Outlook Weekly, a well-known magazine in China.
Ren's opinion was echoed by Zhang Peiqun, also a meteorologist with the center.
Zhang said the rainfall in worst-hit Yunnan since September last year is the lowest in about 50 years while the average temperature since the beginning of winter is the highest.
"The decreased rainfall during the rainy season led to less water in store and high temperatures resulted in greater evaporation, directly causing the severe drought," Zhang said.
Zhang said the reasons underlying it were the complicated ocean currents and anomalous atmospheric circulation.
Zhang said the lingering cold air mass that formed last September in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau had fenced off the warm and moist currents from the Indian Ocean and the Bay of Bengal, and at the same time the cold air from the north has had difficulty reaching the Yunnan-Guizhou plateau hinterland.
"The cold and warm currents can't converge to produce rain, so there is little rain," Zhang said.
Sun Honglie, director of the national expert committee on climate change, told the magazine that he was inclined to believe that the drought was a result of anomalous atmospheric currents.
"It is not an environmental or ecological problem," he said. "But the drought is bound to have an impact on the ecological system."
Another expert, Chen Yiyu, an academic at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, also said the year has seen anomalous climate conditions globally and that the drought in China is part of the phenomenon.
Globally, climate-related natural disasters have climbed from less than 50 a year in the 1950s to between 350 and 450 a year in the 2000s. In 2009, extreme weather events affected 55 million people around the world, according to figures released by the UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR).
Reverend Blair wrote:Er, he seemed polite enough to me, bidding you a nice day and all.
Do you really think so? Then you're more easily fooled than I thought.
Did you you stick to science & politics back at RDF, or did you ever cross virtual swords with any fundies? I did, and I've seen these tactics before, many times.
I wrote a fairly long and carefully constructed post, in which I felt it necessary to state the bleeding obvious in an effort to correct previous misrepresentations of my position, and to prevent future ones, and he replies with a quote-mine of one of those statements of the obvious, tagging a "Thank you" and nothing else on the end.
That "reply" looks specifically designed to appear to the casual observer as though I have just conceeded defeat on that particular point, and that he is being magnanimous in victory, when in fact you and I (and pistacor) all know that that has been my position all along.
That's the kind of behaviour I'd expect from a fundy.
Then, when asked to elaborate, instead of answering the question, he continues the pretense with a flippant "Have a nice day."
That's just twattish.
I might add, Rev, that after 8 pages, you are still the only one that has even acknowledged, let alone addressed my actual argument, and Fact-Man the only other major contributor who has directly responded to my posts without misrepresenting them.
Pistacor didn't start it, but he has apparently chosen to pick up the baton and run with it. After so much time, and so many corrections on my part, I can only assume that the continuing misrepresentations are deliberate.
So, Pistacor... Thank you.
I sincerely mean that. If you bother to actually read this, and are able to understand it, you might even appreciate why.
Those of you who were paying attention during the first few pages of this thread will remember the primary basis for my scepticism regarding certain aspects of the climate change debate. For those who came in late, and for those who were not paying attention, it is here:
Mysturji wrote:SOME people (not all) seem a little too cocksure about climatology's predictive powers. (And even that issue is much less about the actual science than it is about the arrogance of some of the people involved.)
Since - after 8 pages - pistacor has still not addressed my argument, I thank him for demonstrating its validity so effectively.
I am of course referring to arrogance. The sort of arrogance that can cause someone to spend a not inconsiderable amount of time and effort deliberately misrepresenting someone else's position, ignoring most of their words and twisting others, while thinking that nobody will notice because they're so much smarter than everyone else. (By "everyone else", obviously I mean non-scientists. You know... the ignorant masses - "peasants with pitchforks".)
Previously, no less than three times in this thread my position was misrepresented: here, here and (just as I thought I was actually, finallystarting to get through...) here.
And no less than three times, I objected: here, here and here.
And I have tried to set the record straight an additional two times: here and here.
Once can easily be attributed to an error.
Twice seems careless, but could be due to a genuine misunderstanding.
Three times, and it's deliberate.
And now it has happened a fourth time:
piscator wrote:
Mysturji wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm not disputing the science. The climate is changing and Human activities are making a significant contribution to that change.
I must admit that the "starting to get through" post I linked to above caused a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. Eventually though, I decided that it was so incongruous with the rest of pistacor's posts and this thread in general that I had to discount it, except to regard it as conclusive proof that pistacor has been dishonest - though there is no evidence to indicate which position he really holds.
I have made this request before, to specific people, and my requests were ignored. Now I politely make the same request again - to anyone and everyone who wants to, for whatever reason. Please check for yourself:
Please search my posts in this thread, and try to find any statement I myself have made which contradicts the science of climate change, or where I deny that it is happening or that Human activities are contributing to it. If you find any such statement posted by me, please provide a link to it. Please search thoroughly. I really don't think you will find one. The closest I have ever come to saying anything of the sort is to say (in various ways) that the future is unknown, and there may perhaps be factors that have not yet been taken into consideration. My reasons for this reservation about the future are that unlike some, I am not so arrogant as to think that I can predict the future with 100% accuracy, and I recognise that science is by definition a learning process, and that we're still learning.
Nor am I arrogant enough to claim the ability to control the weather, unlike some. Yet when I asked for evidence to support this bald assertion, the request was ignored. I have asked many times for evidence to support things that people have said (mainly about what they said I had supposedly said) . Those requests have all been ignored.
Perhaps they thought that no-one would notice.
Or maybe it's just hit-and-run cowardice.
I know I got off to a bad start in this thread. I got angry, I was rude and I made errors (mainly of judgement, including allowing myself to be goaded), and I have admitted those errors and apologised where I thought it appropriate. Apart from those posts for which I have admitted errors, and for which I have apologised, I stand by every word I have written in this thread - including this post.
Would that all of my opponents had displayed such integrity.
I am not expecting an apology for pistacor's mendacious misrepresentations of my posts - not after he has displayed such arrogance - nor would I particularly want one as it would be extremely unlikely to be sincere (rather like his "thanks" above). But one would have thought that he would at least be man enough to acknowledge his errors - however innocent he might pretend them to be.
The level of arrogance, mendacity and cowardice I have encountered in this thread is staggering. Especially considering the motivation supposedly behind it.
Lying for Jesus I can understand (sort of), but lying for science?
Shame.
Because who cares when a fundy gets caught and discredited for lying for Jesus? It's not as if he was arguing for anything important.
People who behave like that in the name of science are (IMHO) a bigger threat to the world than China India and McDonalds combined.
Because the arrogance alienates people just when you really need them on your side, the lies discredit the science (if they lied about that, what else are they lying about?), and the cowardice means that it is unlikely to change.
But just to show there's no hard feelings, I leave you with this:
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
...The level of arrogance, mendacity and cowardice I have encountered in this thread is staggering. Especially considering the motivation supposedly behind it.
Lying for Jesus I can understand (sort of), but lying for science?
Shame.
Because who cares when a fundy gets caught and discredited for lying for Jesus? It's not as if he was arguing for anything important.
People who behave like that in the name of science are (IMHO) a bigger threat to the world than China India and McDonalds combined.
Because the arrogance alienates people just when you really need them on your side, the lies discredit the science (if they lied about that, what else are they lying about?), and the cowardice means that it is unlikely to change....
Mysturji, this part of your post (and also where you made it clear that it was Piscator you were referring to) steps over the line towards a personal attack. Please refrain from this in future; it is fine to complain that your arguments have been misrepresented, and give evidence for this (and I think you are probably right to an extent, but it was not an ad hom). This is an official warning.
Mysturji wrote:The level of arrogance, mendacity and cowardice I have encountered in this thread is staggering. Especially considering the motivation supposedly behind it.
Lying for Jesus I can understand (sort of), but lying for science?
Shame.
Because who cares when a fundy gets caught and discredited for lying for Jesus? It's not as if he was arguing for anything important.
People who behave like that in the name of science are (IMHO) a bigger threat to the world than China India and McDonalds combined.
Because the arrogance alienates people just when you really need them on your side, the lies discredit the science (if they lied about that, what else are they lying about?), and the cowardice means that it is unlikely to change.
i agree that 'lying for science' is destructive.
Which is why people like Ian Plimer, Bob Carter, Monckton, Watts and all the other shameless FUD demagogues should be publicly discredited.
About me: If I had my way I'd buy a few acres of land and an old tractor. I'd drive the old tractor around the land and passers-by would stop to ask me what kind of crop I was farming. "Crop?" I'd say, "Crops are work, I'm planting ideas."
nah, I post by using automatic typing so as to avoid thinking. Also. the pyramids were built by time-travelers.
Then you're more easily fooled than I thought.
Yup, I'm just a poor country rube from Saskatchewan. Never seen the big city before. Never went to skool. I put the simp in simple right after I was done putting the cunt back in country.
Did you you stick to science & politics back at RDF, or did you ever cross virtual swords with any fundies?
i never bothered with fundies much at RDF. I get enough of that in real life, and there were many there to deal with the trolls and geeks.
I did, and I've seen these tactics before, many times.
I saw a man pee on a tree today. I was a bit taken aback until I realized that man was me.
I also saw an incredibly irresponsible man letting a dog drive his truck. The dog drove into a post though, and broke a headlight, the left light valance, and put a dent in the hood. Serves the bastard right. Also, I need to find some parts before Mrs. Rev notices she's still married to a fucking goober who lets the dog drive his truck.
I wrote a fairly long and carefully constructed post
I've pounded some pickets in my time.
I felt it necessary to state the bleeding obvious in an effort to correct previous misrepresentations of my position, and to prevent future ones, and he replies with a quote-mine of one of those statements of the obvious, tagging a "Thank you" and nothing else on the end.
I dunno. I'm a pretty careful reader. I'm also a believer in nuance and giving the benefit of the doubt. I've never quite figured your position out,but I can certainly understand why others have designated a certain place for you in the pantheon of possible positions. As my Grandma told me a time or two, "You have to be careful what you say, because somebody might listen."
That "reply" looks specifically designed to appear to the casual observer as though I have just conceeded defeat on that particular point, and that he is being magnanimous in victory, when in fact you and I (and pistacor) all know that that has been my position all along.
Ah, yes, the "You and I and Cisco," or in this case Piscator, argument. I doubt that you and I and Cisco, or in this case Piscator, know a damned thing though. I know that the scientists know a fair bit, and I know I try pretty hard to stay informed, but I also let my dog drive my truck. On a scale of one to 643 of Who Ya Gonna Trust?, I tend to pick the experts overt anonymous internet denizens like you and I.
That's the kind of behaviour I'd expect from a fundy.
Odd, because he's neither threatened me with hell nor tried to rob me. I think perhaps you need more experience of fundies.
Then, when asked to elaborate, instead of answering the question, he continues the pretense with a flippant "Have a nice day."
That's just twattish.
See, when people tell me to have a nice day, I tend to do so. It's never a bad idea. If they didn't mean it, following their advice will just piss them off.
Anyway, a friend just walked in with a couple quarts of custom made Rheumatiz medicine. In the morning I have a hangover and a trip to see some ponies to tend to. How 'bout we try again after that? In the meantime, here's a song:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBbuPnfG ... feature=iv[/youtube]
This is my first post in this thread. I just wanted to say that there's hardly any skepticism here in Korea. Korea is increasing its investment in green energy much, much faster than any other country. I read that in the news a couple of days ago, but I can't find the story now.
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
...The level of arrogance, mendacity and cowardice I have encountered in this thread is staggering. Especially considering the motivation supposedly behind it.
Lying for Jesus I can understand (sort of), but lying for science?
Shame.
Because who cares when a fundy gets caught and discredited for lying for Jesus? It's not as if he was arguing for anything important.
People who behave like that in the name of science are (IMHO) a bigger threat to the world than China India and McDonalds combined.
Because the arrogance alienates people just when you really need them on your side, the lies discredit the science (if they lied about that, what else are they lying about?), and the cowardice means that it is unlikely to change....
Mysturji, this part of your post (and also where you made it clear that it was Piscator you were referring to) steps over the line towards a personal attack. Please refrain from this in future; it is fine to complain that your arguments have been misrepresented, and give evidence for this (and I think you are probably right to an extent, but it was not an ad hom). This is an official warning.
I was not attacking the person. I was attacking the behaviour. This is a fine but important distinction.
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
...The level of arrogance, mendacity and cowardice I have encountered in this thread is staggering. Especially considering the motivation supposedly behind it.
Lying for Jesus I can understand (sort of), but lying for science?
Shame.
Because who cares when a fundy gets caught and discredited for lying for Jesus? It's not as if he was arguing for anything important.
People who behave like that in the name of science are (IMHO) a bigger threat to the world than China India and McDonalds combined.
Because the arrogance alienates people just when you really need them on your side, the lies discredit the science (if they lied about that, what else are they lying about?), and the cowardice means that it is unlikely to change....
Mysturji, this part of your post (and also where you made it clear that it was Piscator you were referring to) steps over the line towards a personal attack. Please refrain from this in future; it is fine to complain that your arguments have been misrepresented, and give evidence for this (and I think you are probably right to an extent, but it was not an ad hom). This is an official warning.
I was not attacking the person. I was attacking the behaviour. This is a fine but important distinction.
OK, saying that is a good step foraward in this thread which I appreciate, although using the words "arrogance, mendacity and cowardice" is perhaps a little risky, since it can be read as implying something quite unpleasant and personal about other posters in the thread. Hopefully, from now on, everybody can stick to attacking arguments in ways that don't have the appearance of personal attacks...
Mysturji wrote:
Because the arrogance alienates people just when you really need them on your side, the lies discredit the science (if they lied about that, what else are they lying about?), and the cowardice means that it is unlikely to change.
That seems to imply that the problem isn't the amateur 'skeptics' with no scientific training, attacking the scientific community with assertions of icompetence and fraud (which to me is arrogant beyond measure). No, the problem is the scientists who don't waste more of their time and resources dealing with every notjob accusation and wooly alternative 'theory' that get's trown their way, as well as those of the public who defend the scientists with the a similar energy as that with which they get attacked in the first place.
I haven't seen any substantiated evidence of 'lying' being exposed in the scientific literature. Media and politicians, yes, but they (on purpose or not) do this about every subject.
Hit and run tactics: Making accusations/misrepresentations, then ignoring/evading direct questions and requests for evidence, then doing it again.
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
Maybe we can't predict the future , but each one of us can influence it a little bit, and maybe those small contributions will help those that come after us. The problem as I see it, is the time frame, When change happens gradually it's hard to see. Old people have always been guilty of saying:" You think this is bad, when I was young....", and we treat that as a joke. Same with climate change. It will be a gradual process, and people will just accept it, especially those of us in the affluent nations. We'll feel very little pain. Those who have the least will lose the most. The States and Canada might lose some grain producing areas, but we'll still have plenty, we produce an excess as it is. There just wont be any left over for those who'll need food the most. The large corporations will still control the produce and resources, and we'll pay whatever they decide. It's always been so, and always will be so.
I sold my 4X4 truck and bought a Subaru Forester. I can fit my tools in it, and now I use half the gas. If I need to haul lumber or building products, I use a trailer or have it delivered. I heat my house with wood I cut on my property, and keep the heat down in the winter, if it's chilly I just add a couple more cats on the bed. I have no air conditioning, just ceiling fans, they run winter and summer. I turn lights off when not required, I have all electronics off when not in use. I don't buy stuff just because it's new, I'm satisfied with a lower grade computers. I have fluorescent light bulbs everywhere I have lights. I try to create as little waste as possible, and I compost. I have a garden and I pick berries in the bush. I don't throw clothing away just because new styles came in. I even darn my work socks. I don't travel to town unless I have to.
There are many things we can do to make our carbon foot print smaller. But you have to start somewhere.
If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.-Red Green
"Yo". Rocky
"Never been worried about what other people see when they look at me". Gawdzilla
"No friends currently defined." Friends & Foes.
