Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by Dayton3, Mar 18, 2019.
That's just pathetic on your part.
That's a blog run by a man using a fake identity in order to mislead people.
So I'm still waiting on facts, not claims that you wish were true and lack the foresight to factcheck.
Nothing is ever truly "proved" by science. That's every bit as much a non argument as the opposite, claiming that climate change is false because the goalposts have shifted.
Gravity was and still is a theory. It always will be.
Same with evolution.
Nonetheless the evidence overwhelmingly supports a model where climate change is not only real but unprecedented and politics don't come into that.
When we are looking at a site which demonstrates climate change is false by pointing out more people died in a 1780 typhoon than in Haiyan you know something is very wrong.
They don't teach science in Arkansas.
Either you're too stupid to understand that you're being lied to by the author of this site, or you're actively engaging in the same deception. Which is it?
The tragic thing in this thread is that we're seeing the whole timeline of denier behaviour playing out.
It's fake -> Science isn't certain yet -> It's happening but won't be that bad -> It's happening but stopping it is more expensive than letting it happen-> It's too late to do anything.
Take home message if there is one.
There's no such thing as "too expensive".
No financial cost is too great here.
That isn't true. I've taught 6th grade science for two years. Now I know that isn't very high level. We've done things like study the structures of cells, layers of the Earth, types of clouds, that sort of thing. And the coach above me in rank is supposed to be an excellent chemistry and physics teacher.
Holy shit THIS.
Well, putting it short without derailing the thread too much, I'm Marxist. I like Lenin. I don't like Trotsky.
The dumb thing about the term "Stalinist" is it doesn't exist according to Marxist terminology. I don't know of a single party now or in the past that has called itself Stalinist. I don't know anyone above the age of 20 who would willingly call himself Stalinist even if he or she agreed with all that Stalin did. Maybe the closest to "Stalinism" - and it's pretty much only used as an insult - is Hoxha and the Party of Labor of Albania.
"Ism" in "Marxolingua" means that the theory and practice of Marxism is elevated to a new level (compare, dialectical jump.) Leninism could be seen as such a jump since Lenin formulated the theory of imperialism as the latest stage of Capitalism. Some people call themselves "Maoists," I believe that to be a mistake. Lastly, Stalin crafted few theories, had poor command of some of the existing ones and committed some grave errors. Specifically treating contradictions within the people as antagonistic contradictions when that could very much be disputed.
Got long anyway. Use smaller text size?
Our substitute gym coach neglects the fact that research is continuing for the purpose of measuring change and trying to know the full extent of the causes in order to find ways to combat them. We know many of the reasons for it, and it is not a guess or in question, but that does not mean we stop all research and throw our hands up in the air.
This is why @Dayton3 is a substitute gym teacher who cannot get tenure even in a shithole like Arkansas. This is also why he is not a scientist, and he could only get a mail order degree in business management by answering multiple choice questions because classes were too hard for him.
Of course we continue to do research. I've never suggested otherwise.
If your house was about to burn down with your whole family was trapped in it and you could pay to stop that from happening, I’m pretty sure that most people would. But when it comes to the only planet we can currently survive on, it becomes a problem.
Another smallish addition and it'll be enough, then, because I forgot the dividing line (getting old here.)
For a Marxist subset of theory to qualify as an "ism" it's standard practice that it be universally applicable (well, on planet Earth.) That's why Lenin and Stalin and Mao's contributions in "applying the theory of revolution and Communist ideology on local conditions" doesn't qualify, and why Lenin's 'Materialism and Empiriocritisism" does.
Note, the CCP did make some advances on foreign policy with the Marxist Three Worlds theory.
Been amused by that tagline for a while now. No, I know what you mean, but part of the truth is better than none at all.
We'll never get more than that.
That kind of ridiculous exaggeration is one reason I don't take climate change all that seriously. The worst possible climate change projections multiplied several times over would not result in the Earth becoming uninhabitable by humans
He”s not the one who’s doing the lying, NASA is.
You're actually taking that site seriously?
You do know NASA don't represent the entirety of the climate research happening?
On the contrary, even the more conservative estimates do exactly that.
You can't seriously believe that. Even if all the ice caps melt and desertification spreads dramatically the Earth could still probably support a few billion people. Not the six or seven billion we have now but a few billion certainly.
You do know a lot of climate scientists use data from NASA.
Fine, you can still live in your burned house but all your nice stuff will be ruined. Not that you even have nice stuff.
A burned house is a far cry from human extinction.
The human species is close to extinction proof, our civilization is not though. You’re clearly fine with millions and possibly billions dying, so that probably isn’t an issue for you. Plus you’ll be dead in about 20 years anyway, so nothing matters to you.
I have hopes of living until 2062 so not 20 years from now. I'm not "fine" with millions or billions dying. I just don't see it as being likely from a couple of degrees of warmer weather.
You have a very poor understanding of how the climate works. Warmer temperatures will affect weather all over the planet and already is. Have you noticed how droughts are just common now and how hurricanes are getting stronger? You live near the gulf coast, you should. This will affect crops, meaning less food. In case you aren’t aware, we need food to eat. There’s going to be more refugees moving from areas that are no longer inhabitable and this will probably include people in the poorer parts of America.
Too stupid, got it.
Separate names with a comma.