Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #482218

Re: Snit's apocalypse cult.

From	Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics, alt.checkmate, talk.politics.guns
Subject	Re: Snit's apocalypse cult.
Date	2018-12-30 16:08 +0000
Message-ID	<g8s8s0FlngdU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	(8 earlier) <d8ag2ep13ric7budpm36bqncmg5ae9aiub@4ax.com> <g8qp2tFbthdU1@mid.individual.net> <jnbg2etdr8bojmiteejd8otli42s1cgnv7@4ax.com> <g8qq6tFc4h0U1@mid.individual.net> <annh2etcc9pv9eiftn1qjl4f2e99pq58m8@4ax.com>

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 19:52:12 -0700, Snit wrote:
> 
>> On 12/29/18 7:37 PM, Wally W. wrote:
>>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 19:33:00 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 12/29/18 7:12 PM, Wally W. wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 21:25:59 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/28/18 9:19 PM, Wally W. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 20:37:43 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 8:18 PM, Wally W. wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 19:02:33 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 6:49 PM, Wally W. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 17:00:31 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/28/18 4:58 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snit replied:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apocalypse Cults are popular for a reason, people _ needed it.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly and wastefully so:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.globalwarming.org/2012/02/07/the-great-delusion/#more-12926>
>>>>>>>>>>> We go out of our course to make ourselves uncomfortable; the cup of
>>>>>>>>>>> life is not bitter enough to our palate, and we distill superfluous
>>>>>>>>>>> poison to put into it, or conjure up hideous things to frighten
>>>>>>>>>>> ourselves at, which would never exist if we did not make them.
>>>>>>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>>>>>> In centuries hence the global warming boogey man will be seen for
>>>>>>>>>>> exactly what it is  The Great Delusion.  Future generations will
>>>>>>>>>>> wonder how so many people could have believed something so suicidally
>>>>>>>>>>> ridiculous.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> So you deny climate science. Good to know.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> So you spew non sequiturs. Not necessarily good to know, just an
>>>>>>>>> observation.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I don't "deny climate science," I say the FUD derived from
>>>>>>>>> climastrology is a crock.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> What is climastrology?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It was invented to make astrology look respectable.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Never heard of it... but I tend to stick to science and avoid astrology
>>>>>> and the like.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> And do you accept the view of every single scientific organization on
>>>>>>>> the planet?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What is ***the*** view of "every single scientific organization on the
>>>>>>> planet?"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From that link:
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>  Earth's climate has warmed significantly since the late 1800s,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  Human activities (primarily greenhouse gas emissions) are the primary
>>>>>> cause,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  Continuing emissions will increase the likelihood and severity of
>>>>>> global effects, and that
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  People could manage future climate change impacts through intense
>>>>>> efforts at reducing further warming while preparing for any unavoidable
>>>>>> climate changes.
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Where do you claim that single, monolithic view exists in the wiki
>>>>>>> article?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> See the quote, above.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Compare with:
>>>>>>> https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/04/07/asking-the-wrong-question/
>>>>>>> To ferociously insist  as politicians and activists do  that
>>>>>>> man-made climate change is real is meaningless. That remark is worthy
>>>>>>> of a child. It demonstrates no sophistication whatsoever.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> He is on the list of fewer than 70 scientists who deny the general view:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But I never said those folks did not.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are longer lists, including:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.petitionproject.org/
>>>>> 31,487 American scientists have signed this petition
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Interesting how you did not fact check your claim:
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/
>>>> -----
>>>> What's True
>>>> 
>>>> A petition that has been in circulation since 1998 claims to bear the
>>>> name of more than 30,000 signatures from scientists who reject the
>>>> concept of anthropogenic global warming.
>>>> 
>>>> What's False
>>>> 
>>>> The petition was created by individuals and groups with political
>>>> motivations, was distributed using misleading tactics, is presented with
>>>> almost no accountability regarding the authenticity of its signatures,
>>>> and asks only that you have received an undergraduate degree in any
>>>> science to sign.
>>>> -----
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/sep/08/blog-posting/no-30000-scientists-have-not-said-climate-change-h/
>>>> -----
>>>> First of all, the meaning of "scientist" is vague. The minimum
>>>> requirement is a bachelors of science degree. Thats no guarantee that
>>>> the person studied a science related to climate change, or that the
>>>> person pursued a career in science. The petitions website says that
>>>> 12,715 signers hold "BS or equivalent academic degrees."
>>>> 
>>>> When we look at the number of people with some sort of background in
>>>> fields that tie directly to climate change, the petition website said,
>>>> "there are 3,805 scientists trained in specialties directly related to
>>>> the physical environment of the Earth."
>>>> 
>>>> That would be about 12 percent of the total.
>>>> 
>>>> There are, according to the site, 9,029 people with PhDs, which comes
>>>> closer to meeting a higher bar for being thought of as a scientist.
>>>> Based on the sites figures, most of them dont specialize in climate
>>>> change, but they likely are more familiar with scientific methods.
>>>> 
>>>> These important nuances get lost. A 2012 opinion piece in Forbes
>>>> described the signers as "more than 31,000 American scientists from
>>>> diverse climate-related disciplines."
>>>> 
>>>> Thats way off the mark, unless you count veterinarians -- one of the
>>>> degrees that qualifies you as a scientist in the petition project -- and
>>>> physicians.
>>>> 
>>>> We also dont know much about when people signed the petition. The
>>>> website tells us that thousands of signatures came in 1998 and 1999 when
>>>> the petition was first circulated. It also says, "The majority of the
>>>> current listed signatories signed or re-signed the petition after
>>>> October 2007."
>>>> 
>>>> The problem is, the scientific consensus on mankinds role in climate
>>>> change has grown over time. Even if more than half of the signers came
>>>> after that date, it doesnt mean that those who came before remain
>>>> skeptical of climate change.
>>>> -----
>>> 
>>> How many of "every single scientific organization on the planet" have
>>> *any* expertise in climastrology?
>> 
>> It is EVERY SINGLE ONE with a comment. 
> 
> Anyone can make a comment.
> 
>> So even if some who have a 
>> comment are not ones we should see as reputable on the topic, 
> 
> ... you cite them anyway.
> 
>> every 
>> single one we SHOULD count as reputable on the topic accepts the general 
>> consensus.
> 
> Why do opinions of people without qualifications in an area with no
> relevance to their training or work have any weight with you?
> 
> 
>> To be fair, there are likely some in those ranks who do not accept it... 
>> more than the 70 or so listed, but only those fewer than 70 are known to 
>> actively reject it 
> 
> ... counted by whom?
> 
>> and deny the general consensus. And some of them are 
>> no longer alive... so they may very well have accepted the growing 
>> consensus.
>> 
>> Bottom line: one has to HEAVILY hand pick to find scientists who reject 
>> the general consensus 
> 
> What "general consensus?"
> 
> Why must you walk-back a scientific, fact-based "consensus" with the
> qualitative weasel-word "general?"
> 
> If one isn't a closed-minded greenie, one only needs to listen when
> people make themselves known.
> 
> "You can observe a lot by just watching." - Yogi Berra
> 
> The people who are brave enough to buck a fraudlant "consensus" are
> more worthy of a hearing than those who cave to the pressure to
> conform.
> 
> <https://www.inquisitr.com/1299796/climate-change-editorial-gets-professor-fired-from-think-tank/>
> If people ever say that fears of censorship for climate change views
> are overblown, have them take a look at this: Just two days after I
> published a piece in the Wall Street Journal calling for Africa to be
> allowed the all of the above energy strategy we have in the U.S.,
> the Institute for Policy Studies terminated my 23-year relationship
> with them because my analysis and theirs diverge. 
> 
> 
>> based on very strong evidence. And I am sure you 
>> can find some scientists who insist man never made it to the moon.
> 
> False analogy. Not even a good try.
> 
>>> But that didn't stop you from claiming them, did it?
> 
> 
> 

The analogy is excellent. There is amazingly strong evidence man went to
the but surely you can find some educated people who say otherwise. 

It is weak in the reason for denial though — multinational massive
corporations are not funding the denial to offer short term benefits for
the very rich. 

You can deny the science all you want. You can worship the rich all day. I
will stick to the evidence and go with the science.

Thread

Snit's apocalypse cult. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-28 15:58 -0800
  Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:00 -0700
    The REAL climate denier. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-28 16:16 -0800
      Re: The REAL climate denier. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:18 -0700
        Re: The REAL climate denier. Klaus  Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 16:22 -0800
        Science FICTION ( fake news ). Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-28 16:34 -0800
          Re: Science FICTION ( fake news ). Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:39 -0700
            Snit needs his apocalypse cult, Kool-Aid and all. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-28 16:53 -0800
              Re: Snit needs his apocalypse cult, Kool-Aid and all. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:55 -0700
                Re: Snit needs his apocalypse cult, Kool-Aid and all. Klaus  Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 17:06 -0800
          Re: Science FICTION ( fake news ). Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
        Re: The REAL climate denier. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 12:36 -0800
      Re: The REAL climate denier. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:28 -0700
        Re: The REAL climate denier. Klaus  Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 16:51 -0800
    Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 20:49 -0500
      Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 19:02 -0700
        Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 22:18 -0500
          Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 20:37 -0700
            Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-28 23:19 -0500
              Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 21:25 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-29 21:12 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-29 19:33 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-29 21:37 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-29 19:52 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 10:26 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 16:08 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 13:39 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 20:52 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-30 13:56 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 16:02 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 21:50 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 18:44 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 16:49 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-30 22:04 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-30 20:18 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 00:34 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 06:23 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 02:24 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:01 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 13:32 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 18:41 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 13:47 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 11:53 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-12-31 15:38 -0500
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 13:43 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Klaus  Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-31 12:46 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 13:07 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 13:48 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 13:56 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:00 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:04 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:16 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:20 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:21 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:23 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:27 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:35 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:42 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 14:49 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:53 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:14 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:20 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:29 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:32 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:36 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 15:39 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:12 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:26 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:30 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:38 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:47 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:58 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:15 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:59 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:28 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. mouse <emailisevil@none.net> - 2018-12-31 22:55 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 16:03 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:41 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:56 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 13:54 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 15:00 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:25 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 13:38 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. mouse <emailisevil@none.net> - 2018-12-31 20:52 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 13:59 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. mouse <emailisevil@none.net> - 2018-12-31 20:08 +0000
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-31 13:34 -0700
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-02 06:49 -0600
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 05:15 -0800
                Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-30 19:20 -0800
      Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-31 06:48 -0600
  Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:28 -0700
    Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:32 -0700
      Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:40 -0700
        Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
          Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:44 -0700
            Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:46 -0700
    Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Klaus  Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-12-28 16:33 -0800
    Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:36 -0700
      Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 17:42 -0700
        Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 17:45 -0700
          Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-28 18:01 -0700
  Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 18:35 -0800
  Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 22:46 -0800
  Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 23:18 -0800
  Re: Snit's apocalypse cult. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-01 05:20 -0800

csiph-web