Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #106292

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/4/17, 2:52 PM, in article op.yzqhpenpjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 04 May 2017 22:40:52 +0100, Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> 
>> On 2017-05-04 15:45, Snit wrote:
>>> On 5/4/17, 12:38 PM, in article op.yzqbii15js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
>>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 04 May 2017 20:19:26 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 5/4/17, 12:01 PM, in article op.yzp9s7dhjs98qf@red.lan, "James
>>>>> Wilkinson
>>>>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>>> bELIVING IN SHITE LIKE CLIMATE CHANGE IS AS BAD AS BEING RELIGIOUS.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Shit, caps lock, can't be bothered rewriting.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I accept science and the data / evidence that backs it and deny the
>>>>> anti-science nonsense people use to promote socialism for the rich. I did
>>>>> not know you were one of the ones pushing such socialism. For me it is
>>>>> fine
>>>>> that people disagree on if we should socialize the costs of using ancient
>>>>> stores of carbon, but I wish those who pushed for us to do so would be
>>>>> direct and admit that is what they are pushing for. The fact they use
>>>>> science denial to get to that goal shows they cannot really support the
>>>>> socialism they are backing.
>>>> 
>>>> It's nothing to do with socialism.
>>> 
>>> Socializing the costs of using ancient stores of carbon clearly has a LOT to
>>> do with socialism... though it is for the rich.
>> 
>> JWS doesn't understand that "socialise costs" is an economics term, not
>> a political one. Hey, James, it means "not paying for any damage you do
>> to the air, water, soil, etc and so on and so forth". AKA shifting the
>> cost of "externals" onto the general economy. It's the main reason the
>> "free market" has never been free, and has repeatedly failed. Adam
>> Smith's ideal free market works if and only if all prices measure the
>> actual cost of providing the goods and services on offer. Since prices
>> don't and never will do this, there is no such thing as a free market.
>> 
>>>> In fact it's the capitalists who "deny" climate change.  It's the left wing
>>>> greenie treehuggers who think we have the power to change the climate more
>>>> than that huge nuclear reaction in the sky.
>> 
>> Climate is a chaotic system, in which the effects of small changes in
>> some variable increase rapidly once it reaches a certain value, because
>> of inter-dependent feedback loops. If JWS has had as much technical
>> experience as he claims, he knows what feedback is, so he should have no
>> trouble understanding why doubling the CO2 content of the atmosphere
>> will trigger climate changes. But I don't think he's had one-tenth of
>> the technical experience or expertise that he claims. He's a yob,
>> ignorant as a boot.
>> 
>> The only unknown about global warming is how fast it will proceed. It
>> has already begun. It will probably accelerate.
> 
> Way bigger inputs occur naturally and always have.

The implication here is that the climate models do not take into account
these larger inputs (say the effect of the sun). This is an ignorant or
dishonest implication. At the very best it is a dodge from the topic of
man-made global climate change.

> Why do you think we've had hot and cold periods in the past before
> industrialisation?

Nobody has denounced the idea there have been natural changes. But once
again the assumption is scientists have not taken these into account. It is
a false assumption.

> Anyone who believes the government hype about global warming is as stupid as
> those who believe in god.

I spoke of science and evidence and data... I said NOTHING of any
government.

You have a belief held in a religious-like way that the evidence is wrong.
Fine. I do not like it but I cannot change it. But not expect me to adopt
your religion.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 17:42 +0100
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 10:39 -0700
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 19:10 +0100
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 11:22 -0700
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 20:01 +0100
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 12:19 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 20:38 +0100
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 12:45 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 21:48 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 14:34 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-05-04 17:40 -0400
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-04 22:52 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 16:10 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-04 15:25 -0700

csiph-web