Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2014 - 09:16pm PT
|
So now you admit,
the scientists will be silenced by the coal lobbyists.
We agree.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2014 - 09:39pm PT
|
I already quoted some of the EXACT text, & gave the link to the rest, which is summarized in the Sciencemag article Ed posted. It is no wonder you are wrong so often, when you can't even follow what was just posted.
Remember: 97%
The purpose of the republicans is to make it look like the view of the 3% should be weighed as importantly as the 97%.
Just like when Dubya had his buddies rewrite science reports.
|
|
Flip Flop
Trad climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2014 - 09:42pm PT
|
Benghazi
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2014 - 10:06pm PT
|
"Benghazi"
BBBBBEEEEENNNNNNNGGGGGHHHHHHHAAAAAZZZZZZIIIIIIIII!!!!!!!11111111169
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2014 - 11:05pm PT
|
"Oh yeah, like I already posted, get used to it"
No first you denied it,
then finally admitted it.
We are already used to crony politicians ignoring science, so we hardly need an ignorant denier for that information.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2014 - 11:37pm PT
|
First you had the wrong bill and posted the wrong text. Then we see that you were wrong again and it does say that (and that voters should get used to it):
AGAIN, Here is the text, which means a climate scientist can not give advice on the subject in which they are an expert.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1422/text
2 ``(E) Board members may not participate in advisory
activities that directly or indirectly involve review or
evaluation of their own work;
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sidney-shapiro/how-the-house-would-preve_b_6193730.html
Also already posted was info on how Inhofites plan to "Balance" the board. We all know that means UNbalanced like Faux news or how Dubya stacked government with crony lobbyists to substitute BS for science.
Quotes from un-"Balanced" Jim:
In fact, Inhofe thinks the UN invented the idea of climate change to "shut down the machine called America."
While other Republicans are mocked for dodging the the truth about climate change -- I'm not a scientist -- Inhofe thinks the topic is a moot point. "Nobody has uttered the term 'global warming' since 2009," he says. This assertion, while intensely dumb, is actually less embarrassing than others he's made in the past. Here's a collection of his wisdom on the topic:
Don't worry about climate change, Jesus is in charge.
• God's still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.
Environmental regulation reminds him of Hitler.
• What this country does not need is another Gestapo bureaucracy like the EPA
• It kind of reminds... I could use the Third Reich, the Big Lie. You say something over and over and over and over again, and people will believe it, and that's their strategy... A hot summer has nothing to do with global warming. Let's keep in mind it was just three weeks ago that people were saying, 'Wait a minute; it is unusually cool.'
Climate change can't be true if it costs money to fix.
• Addressing Rachel Maddow about the validity of climate science:
"I was actually on your side of this issue when I was chairing that committee and I first heard about this. I thought it must be true until I found out what it cost."
Climate change is good for you!
"The claim that global warming is caused by manmade emissions is simply untrue and not based on sound science. CO2 does not actually cause catastrophic disasters. Actually, it would be beneficial to our environment and the economy."
In fact, increased CO2 emissions will help you live longer!
"First of all, the one degree Fahrenheit rise coincided with the greatest advancement of living standards, life expectancy, food production and human health in the history of our planet. So it is hard to argue that the global warming we experienced in the 20th century was somehow negative."
And never forget, science is for suckers.
"With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that manmade global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? It sure sounds like it."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lanham/james-inhofe-climate-change_b_6142170.html links are embedded in article quotes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inhofe-an-epa-foe-likely-to-lead-senate-environment-committee/2014/11/05/d0b4221e-64f4-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html
http://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/2014/11/20/epa-in-the-crosshairs-as-oklahomas-inhofe-gains-sway-over-climate-policy/
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2014 - 06:49am PT
|
"In recorded history"
LTFOL
Not EVER
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2014 - 08:55am PT
|
Because this thread needs something new under the sun ... this paper just came to my attention. It is dense with formal-logic equations that are way beyond my reading skills, and probably yours too, but certainly takes a far different perspective.
DENIAL LOGIC
†FLORIAN LENGYEL AND ‡BENOIT ST-PIERRE
Abstract. Denial Logic is the logic of an agent whose justified beliefs
are false, who cannot avow his own propositional attitudes or believe tau-
tologies, but who can believe contradictions. Denial Logic DL is defined
as justification logic JL together with the Denial axiom t : E ! ¬E and
the Evidence Pairing axiom s : D ^ t : E ! [s & t] : D ^ E. Using Arte-
mov’s natural JL semantics, in which justifications are interpreted as
sets of formulas, we provide an inductive construction of models of DL,
and show that DL is sound and complete. Some notions developed for
JL, such as constant specifications and internalization, are inconsistent
with DL. In contrast, we define negative constant specifications, which
can be used to model agents in DL with justified false beliefs. Denial
logic can therefore be relevant to philosophical skepticism. We define
coherent negative constant specifications for DL to model a Putnamian
brain in a vat with the justified false belief that it is not a brain in a
vat, and prove a “Blue Pill” theorem, which produces a model of JL in
which “I am a brain in a vat” is false. We extend DL to the multi-modal
logic DL JL LP to model envatted brains who can justify and check
tautologies and avow their own propositional attitudes. Denial Logic
was inspired by online debates over anthropogenic global warming. http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.0389
|
|
sci-fi
climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2014 - 09:34am PT
|
Bruce Kay, I see where you are going with this, but I do not agree that the layman is not allowed to judge the logic and reasoning that is presented to him.
A lot of the climate news are shear non-sense with no foundation in reality. Anybody who looks past the titles and fancy pansy research can see that much of it does not follow coherent argumentation and requires extreme assumptions.
Just because I've done my research at Columbia University and Stanford does not mean that anyone should believe more in my reasoning than in what a carpenter has to say. YOU have to judge the logic and not simply buy in to the consensus model because they are supposedly a bigger group. There is a well-known psychological mechanism built in to most people that makes them want to be on the seemingly winning team, no matter how ridiculous their ideas may be. Do I even have to mention WWII?
Clearly this is not the right forum for any serious discussion as 90% of the contents here is ad hominems, straw-men, and plain stupidity.
I'm out, see you guys on El Cap!
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 24, 2014 - 09:34am PT
|
k-man, what do you want to know about me?
 sci-fi
sci-fi, it's not about you, per-say, but about some of the things you've posted. Folks have asked you to explain some of what you've written, but you seem to duck out on their questions.
Here's one example, wtih two of your posts:
sci-fi
Nov 2, 2014 - 10:05pm PT
The most interesting part of the new IPCC report will be to count how many references they have to Greenpeace reports. They apparently think that kind of stuff should be cited along peer-reviewed studies:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2560/leaked_un_climate_report_slammed_for_citing_wwf_greenpeace
and
You may even call that self-citation, because ecofreaks have clearly infiltrated the IPCC:
http://www.science20.com/science_20/blog/should_greenpeace_be_writing_ipcc_reports-80080
To this, Ed wrote, "which Working Group?"
It's a simple question, and one which a PhD who specializes in research should find easy to answer.
Why didn't you answer then, and can you now? If not, from your own logic, we have to conclude that you're a fraud.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2014 - 09:43am PT
|
thanks for agreeing with my posted photo
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 24, 2014 - 12:13pm PT
|
Clearly this is not the right forum for any serious discussion as 90% of the contents here is ad hominems, straw-men, and plain stupidity.
We were actually hoping that you, sci-fi, would add some balance. You claimed that you were a PhD researcher at Stanford, yet stumbled pretty seriously over relatively easy things. If you wanted serious discussion, there are plenty of folks here willing to engage. However, you turned out to not be one of them.
Have fun on El Cap & I hope you get off before the coming snow storm. Send us a pic if you can.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 24, 2014 - 04:03pm PT
|
Ah, SCI FI did not kiss your azzes and succumb to your BS.
You mean asking to verify a claim is kissing azzes and succumbing to BS?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 24, 2014 - 06:01pm PT
|
Btw, please let us all know what percentage does AGW play in the role of the #1 killer of humans, TODAY?
The Chief, wait until you run out of gas before you think about going to a gas station? Or do you look at a weather report before you head into the mountains?
These things, they're call preparing. If you know something is going to happen, you prepare so you are able to better deal with the issue.
Oh, nevermind....
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 25, 2014 - 09:30am PT
|
Where's your next bullsh!t propaganda story?
Speaking of propaganda, got any more posts from your favorite science-denying blog? You know, the blog that gets torn apart each time you post stories from it?
Or how about one of your neat cherry-picked graphs? Those are fun too.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 25, 2014 - 09:48am PT
|
Some folks keep fooling themselves into thinking this thread is something it's not.
Some see it for what it is.
of course, when we do try to discuss climate change, there are those who can't accept the conclusions and deflect the discussion, usually trying to emphasize the political elements and avoid confronting the science.
For instance, The Chief doesn't believe any of the science... so he rejects any scientific argument, unable to actually understand what those arguments are...
As far as I'm concerned, I'll keep posting the science results I'm interested in... and respond to the various legitimate questions regarding the science. I'm not going to waste time looking at stuff that has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere.
oh, and did you watch any of the football games this weekend? Foxborough had 57ºF at game time on Sunday, and Buffalo, NY is sitting at 40ºF today, with flooding... how come our weather mavens haven't alerted us to these facts? I guess it wouldn't support their rhetoric...
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
|
Nov 25, 2014 - 09:54am PT
|
Ed ,It was a record high 70 f in Buff yesterday,that after a record 24 hour snowfall just 3-4 days earlier.
Just Saying
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!