Is the USA now a rogue state?

[Brian]

20 minutes ago, thelerner said:

Putting aside the warming of the Earth.    What about air pollution?  Water pollution? The acidifying of the ocean?  These are real threats that are shortening the lives of real people.   Hurting the quality of our environment.

 

China has 7 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_in_China) of the most polluted cities in the world.  Millions of people suffer in them.  Thanks in part to the Paris agreement they're not putting in 100's more coal plants.  That a good thing for them and for the world.  Beyond CO2 it releases a poisonous brew of heavy metal and contaminants released.   That's not to say its not valuable, but we'd better wait and or invest in truly clean coal, before burning and releasing poisons. 

 

Having stringent pollution controls is worthwhile.  It is an investment in the future.  India and China are not getting away with something, they are devastating there land and robbing millions of good health.

 

I was in Pittsburgh for a few days last month.  In the 1940's it was the Steel capital of the world.  Made more then anyone else, the furnaces were always burning.  And the buildings were all blackened.  In cemeteries white marble was quickly turned black.  In hospitals pneumonia was rampant, with higher rates then other cities (according to my tour Driver).   Nowadays it's a nice clean city.  They still keep a few buildings blackened as a reminder. 

 

Maybe they didn't have a choice in the 1900's.  But we have one now.  To seek our intelligent ways to be cleaner, conserve more.  Not to poison ourselves.

 

The world is huge, but if it was aquarium sized and we put in the millions of tons of contaminants (or the equivalents) into it, we'd see a difference.  Yes there are other important factors- Sun cycles, volcanic, but for our own sakes, we should do what we can.   Simply to be good care takers of our tank, we'd better do our best to keep it clean, not pollute faster then filters can take.  Forget nations, We are Mankind-  We should be wise enough not to turn our environment into a cesspool. 

 

The industrial revolution is fine, until it starts shortening lives and blackening the skies.  Then responsible government has to step in regulate pollution, lest we slowly slowly kill ourselves.  Knock over one domino too many.  In my life great lake died.. from uncountable life, to dead, catching fire.  We stopped pollutants and it came back.  The ocean is showing strain, the great Reef of 1,000's of years is getting bleached.   The ocean is warming and acidifying.  If it goes, mankind will be hurt. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We are doing horrific things to our environment.  The entire surface of the Earth is a custom-designed O₂-CO₂ reprocessing system yet we are devoting unimaginable amounts of time and money to that one molecule (CO₂).

 

What we are doing to the oceans and swamps and aquifers is far more troubling.  The use of Roundup on food is far more troubling.  Honeybees are far more troubling. Heck! CRISPR is far more troubling.

 

We have LOTS of really disturbing things going on related to our environment and the biosphere but the politicians and mega-corporations want us to focus on CO₂ so...

[Taomeow]

53 minutes ago, thelerner said:

Putting aside the warming of the Earth.    What about air pollution?  Water pollution? The acidifying of the ocean?  These are real threats that are shortening the lives of real people.   Hurting the quality of our environment.

 

China has 7 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_in_China) of the most polluted cities in the world. 

 

Which corporations are making profit off polluting those cities?  Until you know the answer to this question, the point is moot. 

 

There's no such thing as "China polluting," "China" is a word.  The actual physical polluting is not performed by an abstract concept.  It is performed by corporations making profit off polluting the actual physical land and the actual human beings.  E.g. let's say Royal Dutch Shell -- is it making profit off whatever is being done in those Chinese cities that pollutes them?  And if yes, does the agreement about paying for pollution say "China," or does it say "Royal Dutch Shell" must pay for cleaning up the act?  If it says "China," that's a scam.  If it says "Royal Dutch Shell," it's real.  Oops...  it says "China."  Meaning, Royal Dutch Shell will fleece Chinese people to clean (if it feels like it, or not clean, up to them) its own, Shell's, pollution, not "China's pollution of China" but Shell's pollution of China.

 

Same applies to America.  It's not "American people polluting America," and it's not American people who must "clean up their act."  Yet Shell polluting America supports an agreement that asks American people, not itself, to pay for cleaning up their act.  Does it really make sense to you?  Does it make sense to you if I push you aside and take control of your house, burn coal, oil, or marshmallows on the carpet in the living-room, and then demand that you, Thelerner, pay for cleaning it up?  For making me stop burning coal and marshmallows and starting to burn whatever I tell you I will want to burn next?  What will it be?  You don't need to know.  You don't call the shots in your house.  I do.  I do what I please, and then demand you clean up the mess I make.  Looks fair?  Sensible?  Worth fighting for?..  But that's the "Paris agreement" for you... 

 

...and a helluva lot of other "agreements."

 

 

 

Edited June 11, 2017 by Taomeow

[Brian]

10 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

Which corporations are making profit off polluting those cities?  Until you know the answer to this question, the point is moot. 

 

There's no such thing as "China polluting," "China" is a word.  The actual physical polluting is not performed by an abstract concept.  It is performed by corporations making profit off polluting the actual physical land and the actual human beings.  E.g. let's say Royal Dutch Shell -- is it making profit off whatever is being done in those Chinese cities that pollutes them?  And if yes, does the agreement about paying for pollution say "China," or does it say "Royal Dutch Shell" must pay for cleaning up the act?  If it says "China," that's a scam.  If it says "Royal Dutch Shell," it's real.  Oops...  it says "China."  Meaning, Royal Dutch Shell will fleece Chinese people to clean (if it feels like it, or not clean, up to them) its own, Shell's, pollution, not "China's pollution of China" but Shell's pollution of China.

 

Same applies to America.  It's not "American people polluting America," and it's not American people who must "clean up their act."  Yet Shell polluting America supports an agreement that asks American people, not itself, to pay for cleaning up their act.  Does it really make sense to you?  Does it make sense to you if push you aside and take control of your house, burn coal, oil, or marshmallows on the carpet in the living-room, and then demand that you, Thelerner, pay for cleaning it up?  For making me stop burning coal and marshmallows and starting to burn whatever I tell you I will want to burn next?  What will it be?  You don't need to know.  You don't call the shots in your house.  I do.  I do what I please, and then demand you clean up the mess I make.  Looks fair?  Sensible?  Worth fighting for?...  But that's the "Paris agreement" for you... 

 

...and a helluva lot of other "agreements."

 

 

 

No worries! The politicians are going to take care of all these problems, TaoMeow -- just as soon as they get control of enough power and money.  They've promised.

[Jetsun]

3 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

Interesting how the believers say  the global science community is 97% cohesive, and then turn around and say that a wide-reaching collusion is not viable. It is fascinating to see doublethink in vivo.

 

Agreement based on independent research isn't the same as conspiracy to agree based on some kind of paranoid global conspiracy

[Marblehead]

4 hours ago, Brian said:

The sun warms the Earth.

This is mostly true (not considering the warmth from its molten core) but it is the CO2 that prevents the heat from the sun from being reflected back out into space.

 

 

Venus is so hot because it has too much CO2 and nothing (or vey little) can escape.

 

Mars has no atmosphere therefore no CO2 therefore it is cold as , well, not hell but pretty darned cold.

 

Earth started out with vast amounts of CO2 and no oxygen.  Luckily the water temperature was such that life was able to begin.  First were plants which consumed much of the CO2 and pooped oxygen.

 

Not enough CO2 the plants die.  If the plants die everything else will die shortly afterwards (no food).

 

A small increase of CO2 should allow plants to grow stronger and faster.  This would allow for more food as well as provide more oxygen for the animals.

 

 

 

[Taomeow]

30 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

This is mostly true (not considering the warmth from its molten core) but it is the CO2 that prevents the heat from the sun from being reflected back out into space.

 

 

Venus is so hot because it has too much CO2 and nothing (or vey little) can escape.

 

Mars has no atmosphere therefore no CO2 therefore it is cold as , well, not hell but pretty darned cold.

 

Earth started out with vast amounts of CO2 and no oxygen.  Luckily the water temperature was such that life was able to begin.  First were plants which consumed much of the CO2 and pooped oxygen.

 

Not enough CO2 the plants die.  If the plants die everything else will die shortly afterwards (no food).

 

A small increase of CO2 should allow plants to grow stronger and faster.  This would allow for more food as well as provide more oxygen for the animals.

 

 

 

 

Well, I hate to disagree with "oxygen via plants from CO2" because this urban myth is popular with the generally on-the-right-track people, but to keep our argument scientifically accurate and not turn it into the sitting duck for "debunkers" who would, in this case, have a valid point for a change of pace, I have to. 

 

Yes, bottom line is correct, CO2 is not the bad guy.  It becomes the bad guy when you cut down too many trees.  That's because during photosynthesis, green plants do convert atmospheric CO₂ but not into oxygen.  (Which comes from water on this planet.)  They convert it into sugars.  One half the oxygen atoms in the CO₂ wind up in the sugars (e.g., glucose = C₆H₁₂O₆), and the other half wind up in phosphate byproducts of the Calvin Cycle, a biophysical pathway plants use for their energy metabolism needs. During the so-called “reduction phase” of the Calvin Cycle, ATP is used to phosphorylate the 3-PGAs, then NADPH is used to reduce (add electrons to) the 3-carbon compound to produce GAP.  This is accomplished by one of the phosphate (PO₄^3-) groups being removed, and that's what has the other one of the original oxygens from the CO₂.  

 

So, basically, if we get rid of all the for-profit/for-power/for-control obfuscation:  the best way to deal with any and all "excessive" CO₂ from any sources is to stop cutting down forests in general and demolishing the rain forest in particular, and start planting trees instead.  Elementary, Watson.  Any other "solutions" usually boil down to criminal activity disguised as "environmental."   

 

[Marblehead]

You didn't disagree with me.  You just got more specific than I am able to as I do not have that kind of knowledge.

 

So I agree with you even though you disagreed with me and I have changed my mind.

 

 

[gendao]

On 6/6/2017 at 10:30 PM, windwalker said:

yellow and brown ones, really?  

 

Hello racist?

Can you you name any other country in the history of the world that has done more for the world at large besides the US.

For...or you mean to?

Hello facts!

 

Amurica. NUKED. Bikini Atoll...EVERY*FVCKING*DAY for 12 YEARS! 

 

What other country has done that???  What other country has done any of this???

[windwalker]

9 minutes ago, gendao said:

For...or you mean to?

Hello facts!

 

Amurica. NUKED. Bikini Atoll...EVERY*FVCKING*DAY for 12 YEARS! 

 

What other country has done that???  What other country has done any of this???

 

We could go on about what tribes did what and so on,,,what would it prove....maybe that they are "human" like the rest of us.

They lost the war,,,,get over it....and maybe they will to.

 

Posting using the tech you and some others complain about,

but still use and I would imagine enjoy...You do enjoy the freedoms that those test 

helped insure don't  you.....

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by windwalker

[gendao]

41 minutes ago, windwalker said:

We could go on about what tribes did what and so on,,,what would it prove....maybe that they are "human" like the rest of us.

They lost the war,,,,get over it....and maybe they will to.

 

Posting using the tech you and some others complain about,

but still use and I would imagine enjoy...You do enjoy the freedoms that those test 

helped insure don't don't you.....

Lol, well the European invaders destroyed most of the local peoples, their cultures, native animals, old-growth forests, and lands upon arrival here.  Not to mention what all they did around the rest of the world, too. 

Oh yeaaa...gee thanks, 'Murica!!!  ^5

Quote

Mad scientist (also mad doctor or mad professor) is a caricature of a scientist who is described as "mad" or "insane" owing to a combination of unusual or unsettling personality traits and the unabashedly ambitious, taboo and/or hubristic nature of their experiments. As a motif in fiction, the mad scientist may be villainous (evil genius) or antagonistic, benign or neutral; may be insane, eccentric, or clumsy; and often works with fictional technology or fails to recognize or value common human objections to attempting to play God. Some may have benevolent or good-spirited intentions, even if their actions are dangerous or questionable, which can make them accidental villains.

Simple point being, they did a lot more TO the world, than FOR it - as you had ridiculously proclaimed.  No way in H*ll can you spin all this mass destruction as positive contributions!  Much less than...more than any other country in the history of the world??!

 

Now, if you would get over and accept these facts, then you would stop trying to move the goalposts and rationalize yourself otherwise...

Edited June 12, 2017 by gendao

[windwalker]

28 minutes ago, gendao said:

Lol, well the European invaders destroyed most of the local peoples, their cultures, native animals, old-growth forests, and lands upon arrival here.  Not to mention what all they did around the rest of the world, too. 

 

 

 

Oh yeaaa...gee thanks, 'Murica!!!  ^5

Simple point being, they did a lot more TO the world, than FOR it - as you had ridiculously proclaimed.  No way in H*ll can you spin all this mass destruction as positive contributions!  Much less than...more than any other country in the history of the world!!!

 

Now, if you would get over and accept these facts, then you would stop trying to move the goalposts and rationalize yourself otherwise...

 

 

sounds like you might need a trigger warning.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by windwalker

[gendao]

^ Or haystack warning?  Simply posting a 40-min video response is even worse than posting a wall of text...  Great to post it as a reference, but could you please also summarize your key arguments from it first? 

 

I can speedread, but I can't speedwatch.

Edited June 12, 2017 by gendao

[Taoist Texts]

5 hours ago, Jetsun said:

Agreement based on independent research

In academia there is no such thing as "independent research". Science is driven by and beholden to a ruling ideology. The dissenters are ostracized for independence by the community.

 

This is what happens to independent researchers

 

"It has come to their attention"  so they conspired to stifle the threat to their grants and tenures in the bud. The letter is a proof of conspiracy. Simple.

 

 

[Taomeow]

1 hour ago, Taoist Texts said:

In academia there is no such thing as "independent research". Science is driven by and beholden to a ruling ideology. The dissenters are ostracized for independence by the community.

 

This is what happens to independent researchers

 

"It has come to their attention"  so they conspired to stifle the threat to their grants and tenures in the bud. The letter is a proof of conspiracy. Simple.

 

 

 

Yup, this is exactly how it is always done by Dominant Baboon, Ph.D..  Conspiracy to destroy the dissenter; followed by ganging up and taking action; followed by licking the blood off the mugs with utmost satisfaction.  This case is only unique in that the president happens to back up the dissenter, whereas in a typical case the dissenter is alone against the mob.  Not many undertake suicidal missions of challenging the status quo. 

 

How many of the greatest discoveries and inventions in the history of science were made by majority vote?  Zero.  You can't "peer review" the truth if the peers have evolved to their status as such via a vicious and relentless process of unnatural selection -- all of them.

 

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by Taomeow

[Marblehead]

Seems that the human animal hasn't evolved much over the past 40,000 yeas.

 

 

[Brian]

6 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

In academia there is no such thing as "independent research". Science is driven by and beholden to a ruling ideology. The dissenters are ostracized for independence by the community.

 

This is what happens to independent researchers

 

"It has come to their attention"  so they conspired to stifle the threat to their grants and tenures in the bud. The letter is a proof of conspiracy. Simple.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Yup, this is exactly how it is always done by Dominant Baboon, Ph.D..  Conspiracy to destroy the dissenter; followed by ganging up and taking action; followed by licking the blood off the mugs with utmost satisfaction.  This case is only unique in that the president happens to back up the dissenter, whereas in a typical case the dissenter is alone against the mob.  Not many undertake suicidal missions of challenging the status quo. 

 

How many of the greatest discoveries and inventions in the history of science were made by majority vote?  Zero.  You can't "peer review" the truth if the peers have evolved to their status as such via a vicious and relentless process of unnatural selection -- all of them.

 

 

Remember when I speculated on whether the Church would ignore him or destroy him?

 

Heresy cannot be tolerated.

[Jetsun]

5 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Yup, this is exactly how it is always done by Dominant Baboon, Ph.D..  Conspiracy to destroy the dissenter; followed by ganging up and taking action; followed by licking the blood off the mugs with utmost satisfaction.  This case is only unique in that the president happens to back up the dissenter, whereas in a typical case the dissenter is alone against the mob.  Not many undertake suicidal missions of challenging the status quo. 

 

How many of the greatest discoveries and inventions in the history of science were made by majority vote?  Zero.  You can't "peer review" the truth if the peers have evolved to their status as such via a vicious and relentless process of unnatural selection -- all of them.

 

 

 

It's hardly mob justice, the majority of the response was fact checking the original claims as well as clarifying their own position and the majority position. Has the guy been fired or ostracized in any way except by letter? Not as far as I know, is there any evidence his funding has been cut as a result? Nope.

 

Flimsy evidence of mob rule and very flimsy evidence of global conspiracy

[Marblehead]

Well, my weather is changing; I will be getting some rain shortly.

 

[Taomeow]

15 minutes ago, Jetsun said:

 

It's hardly mob justice, the majority of the response was fact checking the original claims as well as clarifying their own position and the majority position. Has the guy been fired or ostracized in any way except by letter? Not as far as I know, is there any evidence his funding has been cut as a result? Nope.

 

Flimsy evidence of mob rule and very flimsy evidence of global conspiracy

 

He is backed by the president, so he is not going to be in the shoes of (e.g.) Arpad Pusztai (with whom I had personal correspondence back in the day) who published the results of his study of the GM potato concluding it's not safe for human consumption.  Yes he was fired, vilified in the press and blacklisted.  End of career of the world's leading lectinologist. 

 

And no one was offering you any "global conspiracy" points.  What was pointed out was the conspiracy within a group marching to the tune of the same drummer, united by a cause they are conspiring to safeguard by discrediting the whistleblower -- with multiple signatures of the conspirators testifying to its real rather than imaginary nature.  Conducing a discussion by setting up straw men, making up the opponent's arguments to attack rather than addressing his/her actual ones, is a tool of demagogy, not of inquiry.  

[Jetsun]

In terms of conspiracy you should look into how large energy firms are funding many of the prominent climate change deniers https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/21/climate-change-denier-willie-soon-funded-energy-industry and how the Koch Brothers have invested over 100 million into the anti climate change industry

[Jetsun]

9 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

He is backed by the president, so he is not going to be in the shoes of (e.g.) Arpad Pusztai (with whom I had personal correspondence back in the day) who published the results of his study of the GM potato concluding it's not safe for human consumption.  Yes he was fired, vilified in the press and blacklisted.  End of career of the world's leading lectinologist. 

 

And no one was offering you any "global conspiracy" points.  What was pointed out was the conspiracy within a group marching to the tune of the same drummer, united by a cause they are conspiring to safeguard by discrediting the whistleblower -- with multiple signatures of the conspirators testifying to its real rather than imaginary nature.  Conducing a discussion by setting up straw men, making up the opponent's arguments to attack rather than addressing his/her actual ones, is a tool of demagogy, not of inquiry.  

 

The repeated theme of this thread is that Climate Change is a global conspiracy aimed at damaging the USA , if that isn't your position then I am glad you clarified. That is the belief of Trump who thinks it is a Chinese invention.

 

And I expect the reason for the intervention letter by the other scientists is because the stakes are so high. We are talking about the future of the planet and survival of humanity, we have to get this right as a species otherwise we are screwed. There needs to be as much clarification, fact checking and hard science going on as possible.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Jetsun

[Brian]

7 minutes ago, Jetsun said:

 

The repeated theme of this thread is that Climate Change is a global conspiracy aimed at damaging the USA , if that isn't your position then I am glad you clarified. That is the belief of Trump who thinks it is a Chinese invention.

 

And I expect the reason for the intervention letter by the other scientists is because the stakes are so high. We are talking about the future of the planet and survival of humanity, we have to get this right as a species otherwise we are screwed. There needs to be as much clarification, fact checking and hard science going on as possible.

So I ask again, what is the proper temperature for the Earth?  Seems a critical question if we are going to "get this right."

[Taoist Texts]

36 minutes ago, Brian said:

 

Remember when I speculated on whether the Church would ignore him or destroy him? Heresy cannot be tolerated.

Right on the money.  Money being the operative word here.

 

Also interesting how the priests of the church evade this basic math in their sermons:

 

Carbon dioxide ... It occurs naturally in Earth's atmosphere as a trace gas at a concentration of about 0.04 percent (400 ppm) by volume.^[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide#Atmospheric_concentration

 

 

Trace gas Carl. It is not even a component gas, its trace. It is 4 hundredth of a percent right now (0.0004    ). Human CO2 is an absolutely negligible addition to this negligible number. The apocalyptic scares are obviously a lie.

 

What interests me is the believer's psychology. They are not dumb, they can do the math. Why dont they? Its a riddle. My guess is they are hardwired to obey. But I might be wrong, help me out here guys. I am baffled. 
 

[Jetsun]

8 minutes ago, Brian said:

So I ask again, what is the proper temperature for the Earth?  Seems a critical question if we are going to "get this right."

 

The earth appears to go through natural cycles of warming and cooling, so the correct temperature is whatever temperature the earth should be at during that point in the cycle.

 

If human activity is interfering with that cycle and pushing up temperatures above expected rates then that is the incorrect temperature for the earth at that point. 

[Brian]

1 minute ago, Jetsun said:

 

The earth appears to go through natural cycles of warming and cooling, so the correct temperature is whatever temperature the earth should be at during that point in the cycle.

 

If human activity is interfering with that cycle and pushing up temperatures above expected rates then that is the incorrect temperature for the earth at that point. 

So "we don't know but it's wrong"?