Mal4Prez nails the climate change debate...

POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 04:17
VIEWED: 12057
PAGE 6 of 11

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, October 6, 2011 12:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Actually, I have much more important things to do...

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, October 6, 2011 1:27 PM

Nick

I'm not sure that I get this, but it came across as incredibly dickish, given the context. Hell, it looks dickish in any event, but I know you knew that I meant the cancer research I was interrupting to discuss climate with Mal, and was getting back to because of her impending imminent death. I don't know that you wanted to give the impression of being the world's biggest dick, but this is the second time you've done it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, October 6, 2011 1:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Nick

I'm not sure that I get this, but it came across as incredibly dickish, given the context. Hell, it looks dickish in any event, but I know you knew that I meant the cancer research I was interrupting to discuss climate with Mal, and was getting back to because of her impending imminent death. I don't know that you wanted to give the impression of being the world's biggest dick, but this is the second time you've done it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

You say that you don't want to debate, yet you post paragraph after paragraph doing just that. You say that you have ripped up the theory of Global Warming, which is now more aptly called Climate Change, but do not have time write an article yet you are here trying to rip it up.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NIKI2

Thursday, October 6, 2011 7:15 PM

Quote:
I'm I the only one that finds it funny that DT will argue against pretty hard science of climate change but then expect people to listen to him about a drinking water contamination conspiracy?

You most definitely are not.

What buckshot are you being hit with, Byte? I'm sure it's just that, or at least I hope it is. As far as

Quote:
"BP -- along with ConocoPhillips and Shell Oil Co. -- are members of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of businesses and environmental groups that back an economy-wide cap to slow, stop and reverse greenhouse gas emissions." So yes, we'd expect them to argue for a cap.

I wonder about that "coalition"...I'm guessing the "businesses" aren't oil and gas... Although, given it was 2009, as you noted, I could see how they'd be part of a coalition if for no other reason than to moderate the coalition's actions. Once people got serious about it, if there were any oil or gas companies in the coalition, betcha they're not NOW!

Quote:
What I really don't get is that at the same time you had people on the right going off about the rapture and on the left going off about catastrophic runaway GW that would turn the Earth into Venus... and neither one of them could see that what they were peddling was the exact same thing: completely bogus end of the world panic.

That you equate the two, DT, makes me laugh. Loudly. One has some--even if you refuse to acknowledge "lots of" science behind it, the other is pure chicanery and ignorance.

Nick,

Quote:
So I'd have to say that I haven't blown him or anything, but we're passing acquaintances.

I love it.

Quote:
If you could shred climate change (what it is called now) you would not be talking to us here but you would preparing you peer reviewed article.

Also excellent.

I, too, usually don't bother with DT's

unless he directs something specifically at me. Even then it's usually only something laughable and not worth addressing. I long ago gave up on DT and accepted that he's talking through his hat at least 50% of the time, making it sound like what he theorizes is accepted fact and refusing to provide backup.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, October 6, 2011 8:23 PM

Good grief. I'm stunned. Someone bring back Kaneman.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

STORYMARK

Thursday, October 6, 2011 8:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
OK, if my post starts a thread, I get to define a rule: it shall not be taken over by back and forths with he who posts the same long ago refuted shit with absolutely no supporting facts or links. You all know what I mean.

Fair enough. I'll refrain from my usual afternoon pasttime of "kick the teabagger".

As for the OP, I agree - you nailed it. I might just steal it and post it elsewhere.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

STORYMARK

Friday, October 7, 2011 12:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Good grief. I'm stunned. Someone bring back Kaneman.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

I don't see how that'll help your posts make more sense.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

BYTEMITE

Friday, October 7, 2011 4:31 PM

What on earth...

DT posted his MATH. Talking through his hat? TEABAGGER? This is mischaracterizing quite a bit of this discussion.

Just because someone disagrees with you does NOT mean they can't make valid points.

Nick, just like all of us, DT can get caught up in long arguments involving long series of posts and not necessarily want to be. The fact that he did and does is not a valid logical counterpoint, pointing it out as an attack on his credibility is an ad hominem.

I note that insulting language, like calling someone a dirty word, is not an ad hominem, as the insults would have to comprise a portion of the subject and the argument and points being made. As such, DT asking you all not to dismiss him - though I admit in an insulting way - is not an ad hominem.

Making arguments from authority and attacking whether someone has expertise is not a valid counterpoint.

All of you who talk about the amount of evidence that contradicts DT, either post it or, if you're certain of your positions, the evidence, and so on, don't bother arguing with him. But this mockery is unnecessary.

NIKI2

Friday, October 7, 2011 5:53 PM

Quote:
DT asking you all not to dismiss him - though I admit in an insulting way - is not an ad hominem.

Is that what he's doing? I doubt it, I think it's clearly as snark...pretty obviously aimed at me. To compare me to Kane is deeply offensive to me, given Kane posts filth and obscenities of the most personal nature, and I was his main target for a long time. I've NEVER, EVER posted anything like what Kane does, so to compare me to him is about as low as one can get.

DT and I've been around and around on this one; a lot of what he posts I find so far out in left field as to be, in my estimation, crazy. He offers things which he indicates clearly are "accepted facts", which they are not. I tried to reason with him, many times, and in the end pretty much gave up and pass over most of his posts unless they're directed at me specifically. It took me a very long time to give up, but in the end I did.

He has said more than once that he comes here to "learn". But I've yet to see him indicate anyone has taught him anything (I may have missed something, admittedly); for the most part he "lectures" and his style is such that it seems like he is indicating the rest of us are idiots. I find that off-putting, so I avoid addressing him the majority of the time.

You can lecture if you wish, but the fact is that we're all fully aware that if you come to RWED, you do so at your own peril. Lord knows I and others have been the butt of Raptor and Wulf and others' nastiness, so while I can't speak for anyone else, taking ME to task, given the material I posted, is pretty unnecessary. If you're addressing your remarks to someone else, that's a different matter.

The reason I don't bother with the climate change issue much anymore is that we've been over it so many times before and proven our points, only to come back and find the same claims made again and again. It's a personal matter, in my estimation; neither those who believe the climate is changing and that man has had a hand in it and those who believe it's a scam will never change their minds, so why should I waste my time yet AGAIN posting what I posted before several times? There are better issues to pay attention to.

I just took the dogs to sulky Crissy Field and then let them play on the beach. Coming back, I took a second to read one of the placards they have there. It was documenting the ocean's rise over time and what it's expected to rise in future "because of global warming", which made me smile. I'm thoroughly convinced that, just like smoking, those with vested interest in keeping things the way they are have worked long and hard to make people doubt climate change, and have been quite successful. It saddens me, but I'm not getting into it yet again, knowing nothing will change.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

BYTEMITE

Friday, October 7, 2011 6:10 PM

Quote:
Is that what he's doing?

Take a look in the context, where his insulting language starts to appear. It's just after he's started to be dismissed by various members, and he does ask to not be dismissed... Though yes, using the term "dick" or similar in the exact same paragraph where he's asking is really not likely to make someone listen to that request. But then, I think we all fall into that trap now and then.

It's when he continued to be dismissed - en mass even - that he mentioned kaneman.

While I see that he escalated the confrontation, another indication he wasn't really using his words all that well, at the same time there was some initial, though not as offensive disrespect he was reacting to.

It can be difficult to see what causes a fight while actively involved in it. Both left and right wing on this board sometimes go after each other with little provocation, sometimes starting right from the headline of a thread. Perhaps DT's initial posts seemed to fall into that category of attacking the basis of the thread/headline/initial poster, though initially I think he WAS just trying to debate some specific points. Certainly he was less offensive at the beginning than say some of the other right wing poster's you mentioned and their knee-jerk response, and considering he actually DOES think that there is a human contribution to climate change, and that this was misunderstood from the beginning, I don't think he deserved the response here that he got.

I don't believe either side is the aggressor more often then the other, I just think I'm being useful by point out to people what sets other people off. Perhaps I'm not.

Huskies! :)

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE