UN Says Climate Genocide Is Coming. It’s Actually Worse Than That.

Sollie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
3,233
#81
the science & facts regarding AGW has nothing to do with politics.
Yes ... and no. Example: The politics comes into it when certain groups like our politicians see this as an opportunity for self enrichement doing the right thing, sabotaging solar power, while pushing for nuclear power stations we can't afford. The default setting of people is that anything associated with it is wrong. The facts are these guys will use a lot of legitimate studies, but then also slip in a few poison apples. which sets the stage for their marketing while something else would have been more appropriate. People discount everything, not just the poison apples, but also the other real studies. While I use us as an example, other similar motives exists.
 

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
23,707
#82
Odds based on what?

Previous climate change events occurred without the impact of humans. So your assertion is not based on any odds, since there is no previous such circumstance to base your guess on.

It is just convenient for your conservative ideology to take that view.
How and why you select what circumstances you regard as significant or not is most certainly a function of your intellectual predisposition in which basic philosophical assumptions and belief structures play a part.

This applies to me.

And to you, whether you recognise and admit it or not.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#83
If that is the best way. The market will just sort it out, because that's individual people making decisions for themselves. There's no need to try and manage it top down.
As with all Libertarians, the assumption that the market will sort it out does not hold true.
A typical example is the Construction industry and the impact of Health and Safety legislation.

The market was happy for decades to continue with no regard for the safety of its workers. Deaths occurred in the 100's per year and since the cost of improving the safety of its workers was overlooked because of the focus on profits, there was no will within the markey to improve such conditions.

The evil governments decided this was enough and enacted various forms of acts and legislations that have set requirements on companies to account for Health and Safety and provide various measures. The fatality rates have dropped by several large percentages, to just a few.

Only with legislation did a change occur.
 

Sollie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
3,233
#84
Xarog, is that you?
I actually found that quite entertaining and thought provoking. It's always good to listen, question, check, learn new stuff ...
As the guy himself said - he's in construction by trade. But then again I've also heard highly qualified and degreed specialists spew drivel that even the blind would see.

Also always have a tinfoil hat in reserve.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#85
How and why you select what circumstances you regard as significant or not is most certainly a function of your intellectual predisposition in which basic philosophical assumptions and belief structures play a part.

This applies to me.

And to you, whether you recognise and admit it or not.
I agree, hence my observation. I would posit that your reasoning on that matter was wrong. Your reasoning may have been ever so influenced by your conservative ideology as such reasoning aligns and conforms with the conventional conservative view on the matter.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#86
I actually found that quite entertaining and thought provoking. It's always good to listen, question, check, learn new stuff ...
As the guy himself said - he's in construction by trade. But then again I've also heard highly qualified and degreed specialists spew drivel that even the blind would see.

Also always have a tinfoil hat in reserve.
Yes, always have an open mind.

I listened to that podcast a while back after Xarog referenced it.

Looked into a few aspects from reputable experts and it was clear how fringe and unfounded that guys views are.
 
Last edited:

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
15,446
#87
Evolution gave birth to the science deniers
Same thing as SJW's and soy boys. Those fekkers are all science deniers, they keep shouting at people to accept consensus as if science is a popularity contest :sneaky:

Repeatable, controlled experiments or GTFO soy boy science deniers!
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#88
Same thing as SJW's and soy boys. Those fekkers are all science deniers, they keep shouting at people to accept consensus as if science is a popularity contest :sneaky:

Repeatable, controlled experiments or GTFO soy boy science deniers!
I agree. There is denial of science from all corners of the political spectrum as cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias kick in and that element of science they disagree with is kicked out.
 

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
23,707
#89
I agree, hence my observation. I would posit that your reasoning on that matter was wrong. Your reasoning may have been ever so influenced by your conservative ideology as such reasoning aligns and conforms with the conventional conservative view on the matter.
That my reasoning "may have been ever so influenced by [my] conservative ideology" is a charge that needs to be supported, lest the same assertion be made about your reasoning and its alignment with progressivist causes.

To avoid becoming hopelessly entangled in a multitude of aspects of what is really a very complex issue, let's start with you first posit: That my reasoning on that matter was wrong. How so? I am very open to learning, preferring dialogue to rhetoric and point-scoring - as I trust do you.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
12,145
#90
Evolution gave birth to the science deniers like anti-vaxxers. Nature correcting that specific denigration of human intelligence.

Anti-vaxxers generally seem to deny other sciences as well.
You do realise how unscientific, anti evolutionarily your argument is. The anti vaxxers have far more kids than highly intelligent lefties and only some of them die. Seems like Intelligence is bad for evolutionary fitness.
 
Last edited:

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#91
That my reasoning "may have been ever so influenced by [my] conservative ideology" is a charge that needs to be supported, lest the same assertion be made about your reasoning and its alignment with progressivist causes.

To avoid becoming hopelessly entangled in what is really a very complex issue, let's start with you first posit: That my reasoning on that matter was wrong. How so? I am very open to learning, preferring dialogue to rhetoric and point-scoring - as trust do you.
Certainly happy to show why I think you are probably wrong.

You believe that the evidence that past climate changes have occurred demonstrates that the current one (if we can agree there is one currently taking place) is occurring on the same basis, i.e. non Anthropogenic reasons.

I would say that that reasoning ignores that the previous climate changes occurred without the humans as part of its "equation". The current environment has had to endure the impact of humans somehow.

So the current climate has an additional element in the equation that is incomparable to previous climate changes. So to say because we had previous ones before, explain the current one speaks to ignoring the potential impact humans have.

My understanding is humans have had an effect and the effect is beginning to be understood and there is research to demonstrate that the effect has caused some changes.

I do think it is at a rate less than what some of the reports say. I think the change is more a mid-term than a short term event (i.e. 50 years as apposed to 10).
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#92
You do realise how unscientific, anti evolutionarily your argument is. The anti vaxxer has far more kids than highly intelligent lefties and only some of them die. Seems like Intelligence is bad for evolutionary fitness.
Anti-vaxxers is a new movement, picking up in the past few years. Let them run their ideologies unabated for a few more generations.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
12,145
#93
As with all Libertarians, the assumption that the market will sort it out does not hold true.
A typical example is the Construction industry and the impact of Health and Safety legislation.

The market was happy for decades to continue with no regard for the safety of its workers. Deaths occurred in the 100's per year and since the cost of improving the safety of its workers was overlooked because of the focus on profits, there was no will within the markey to improve such conditions.

The evil governments decided this was enough and enacted various forms of acts and legislations that have set requirements on companies to account for Health and Safety and provide various measures. The fatality rates have dropped by several large percentages, to just a few.

Only with legislation did a change occur.
As with all libtards, you don't understand what the market is. It isn't a central controlling authority. It is you.

You are the market.

And all your family and all your friends and everyone else that follow your particular ideology.

So if you weren't a hypocrite and actually cared about the stuff you preach online about you can just use your own freedom and money to support businesses in line with that.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#95
As with all libtards, you don't understand what the market is. It isn't a central controlling authority. It is you.

You are the market.

And all your family and all your friends and everyone else that follow your particular ideology.

So if you weren't a hypocrite and actually cared about the stuff you preach online about you can just use your own freedom and money to support businesses in line with that.
I know who the market is.

People still chose companies to build for them regardless of how many people they killed. They did it for countless decades. Construction companies were not disbarred from bidding on projects because they killed 10 people on the last job.

The market (people like you and me) chose the companies.

The evil government said hold on a minute, why are you killing so many people. Lets put this law and act in place. In countries that did this, the change was observed almost immediately.

Looking at unregulated construction industries, such as Qatar, where they have killed hundreds on the construction of the football stadia, the market has chosen to keep with them.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
12,145
#96
I know who the market is.

People still chose companies to build for them regardless of how many people they killed. They did it for countless decades. Construction companies were not disbarred from bidding on projects because they killed 10 people on the last job.

The market (people like you and me) chose the companies.

The evil government said hold on a minute, why are you killing so many people. Lets put this law and act in place. In countries that did this, the change was observed almost immediately.

Looking at unregulated construction industries, such as Qatar, where they have killed hundreds on the construction of the football stadia, the market has chosen to keep with them.
The people that have a problem with that should boycot it. Easy. If they don't then it's not a problem.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#97
The people that have a problem with that should boycot it. Easy. If they don't then it's not a problem.
People never boycotted construction companies.

The deaths in construction were always perceived to be just "part of the job", like fighting in a war.

So I am not surprised that yoy think preventable deaths is not a problem.

Only when governments intervened did companies begin to realise that they can actually prevent those deaths.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
12,145
#98
People never boycotted construction companies.

The deaths in construction were always perceived to be just "part of the job", like fighting in a war.

So I am not surprised that yoy think preventable deaths is not a problem.

Only when governments intervened did companies begin to realise that they can actually prevent those deaths.
Your thinking is way to narrow. Who gives a shît about the construction companies. Boycot the whole thing if the buildup to it goes against what you believe in.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
2,861
#99
Your thinking is way to narrow. Who gives a shît about the construction companies. Boycot the whole thing if the buildup to it goes against what you believe in.
You are thinking to narrow. I use this example to show how the much trumpeted trope that the market doesn't need government legislation to make it work can be wrong.

You have not addressed the point. Just deflecting around it.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
12,145
You are thinking to narrow. I use this example to show how the much trumpeted trope that the market doesn't need government legislation to make it work can be wrong.

You have not addressed the point. Just deflecting around it.
Except you haven't provided an example of the market not working or needing legislation. Your example is a government project.
 
Top