|
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
 Bismarck.Ihina
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3187
By Bismarck.Ihina 2014-11-21 02:52:22
Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in?
Like I said earlier, I'll be happy to discuss the second chart as soon as we finish the current topic.
I'll recap since it's been a long day.
I provided you two different sources of data, that goes back 134 or so years, that shows the average global temperature have increased. You reply by saying you highly doubt those numbers are correct, and then casting doubt on an entirely different chart, one that covers several centuries and uses an entirely different methodology for its data.
If we can go back to the original topic at hand, what are your reasons for 'highly' doubting the data of the original two charts I provided, the ones that goes back 134-ish years.
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-21 03:05:55
Blah. Shoulda gone into tech development. Guess I would be considered part of the Climate Adaptation group. I AM THE ONE PERCENT
 Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-11-21 03:06:25
Not really,
Improved solar cells? Those are decades old.
Improved batteries? Batteries have been around for a Very long time.
Improved... Wind turbines? Again old.
Throwing money at MINOR improvements on old idea's is not good business. Farming? That's millenia old.
I guess we should close down all of our agricultural research stations.
Bad rationale is bad.
LoL what research stations would those be? Also, I'm all for cutting all aid to every single farmer. It would level the playing field dramatically.
[+]
By Altimaomega 2014-11-21 03:07:15
Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in?
Like I said earlier, I'll be happy to discuss the second chart as soon as we finish the current topic.
I'll recap since it's been a long day.
I provided you two different sources of data, that goes back 134 or so years, that shows the average global temperature have increased. You reply by saying you highly doubt those numbers are correct, and then casting doubt on an entirely different chart, one that covers several centuries and uses an entirely different methodology for its data.
If we can go back to the original topic at hand, what are your reasons for 'highly' doubting the data of the original two charts I provided, the ones that goes back 134-ish years.
I've tried to explain my rational a few times. I realize I suck at it, if I was good at relaying my thoughts into words Jet and Jassik would be out of a job.. Why don't you try and explain to me why I should believe that chart is accurate bedside's "scientist said so".
No rush, I'm going to bed right now.
By Jetackuu 2014-11-21 03:07:21
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way. You must not have read the same 3 pages I have.
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way.
Jet can't help flinging poo, its in his nature. Here you are talking about yourself again, I mean you are a dairy farmer.
By Jetackuu 2014-11-21 03:08:13
Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in?
Like I said earlier, I'll be happy to discuss the second chart as soon as we finish the current topic.
I'll recap since it's been a long day.
I provided you two different sources of data, that goes back 134 or so years, that shows the average global temperature have increased. You reply by saying you highly doubt those numbers are correct, and then casting doubt on an entirely different chart, one that covers several centuries and uses an entirely different methodology for its data.
If we can go back to the original topic at hand, what are your reasons for 'highly' doubting the data of the original two charts I provided, the ones that goes back 134-ish years.
I've tried to explain my rational a few times. I realize I suck at it, if I was good at relaying my thoughts into words Jet and Jassik would be out of a job.. Why don't you try and explain to me why I should believe that chart is accurate bedside's "scientist said so".
No rush, I'm going to bed right now. Somehow, I doubt that.
[+]
By Altimaomega 2014-11-21 03:11:08
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way. You must not have read the same 3 pages I have.
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way.
Jet can't help flinging poo, its in his nature. Here you are talking about yourself again, I mean you are a dairy farmer. Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in?
Like I said earlier, I'll be happy to discuss the second chart as soon as we finish the current topic.
I'll recap since it's been a long day.
I provided you two different sources of data, that goes back 134 or so years, that shows the average global temperature have increased. You reply by saying you highly doubt those numbers are correct, and then casting doubt on an entirely different chart, one that covers several centuries and uses an entirely different methodology for its data.
If we can go back to the original topic at hand, what are your reasons for 'highly' doubting the data of the original two charts I provided, the ones that goes back 134-ish years.
I've tried to explain my rational a few times. I realize I suck at it, if I was good at relaying my thoughts into words Jet and Jassik would be out of a job.. Why don't you try and explain to me why I should believe that chart is accurate bedside's "scientist said so".
No rush, I'm going to bed right now. Somehow, I doubt that.
Don't you get tired of saying "No u" in different ways?
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-21 03:11:11
I think what he's saying is that this isn't even his final form :O
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-11-21 03:13:00
I think what he's saying is that this isn't even his final form :O
Well see you first transform into a giant enemy crab...
speaking of forms:
YouTube Video Placeholder
[+]
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-21 03:14:47
I played ffxi so I have plenty of experience dealing with enemy crabs.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-11-21 03:19:54
Blah. Shoulda gone into tech development. Guess I would be considered part of the Climate Adaptation group. I AM THE ONE PERCENT seems like a plan, pardon me while I go start a non-profit to develop new technology and apply for a grant.
edit: nvm, too much paperwork.
Bismarck.Ihina
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3187
By Bismarck.Ihina 2014-11-21 03:29:10
I've tried to explain my rational a few times. I realize I suck at it, if I was good at relaying my thoughts into words Jet and Jassik would be out of a job.. Why don't you try and explain to me why I should believe that chart is accurate bedside's "scientist said so".
Maybe it hasn't come out correctly yet. It seems like you're being sidetracked by the second chart, one that uses a different methodology that reaches back several centuries. Not to say it's entirely wrong, but it is possible that those numbers aren't as precise as the original two charts that go back 140ish years.
And the reason you should believe those charts are accurate is because they've been crossed checked. I agree that blindly trusting just one site/chart can be dangerous. That's why I bought in the second source because I wanted to show separate institutions coming to the same conclusion.
Just to be safe again, here is a third source
http://www.cejournal.net/?p=2740
As you can see, all three different sources that I provided showed a trend of temperature increases in the last few decades.
If three sources aren't enough, how many different sources saying the same thing will it take for you to believe something is true? What reasons do you have to believe that these three institutions are putting out flawed information?
Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-11-21 03:43:45
Blah. Shoulda gone into tech development. Guess I would be considered part of the Climate Adaptation group. I AM THE ONE PERCENT You can always go into tech development, or open your own business if through your research you have a product idea.
Just take your idea to an engineering/industrial design firm to create the actual design and build the prototype for you. It's what a lot of firms/individuals do as people generally don't have all the technical expertise or law knowledge needed to make a functioning and legal product.
This I found interesting
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-21 03:52:19
As long as it doesn't distract from my tree hugging, I'm open to anything! Good thing to keep in mind though, thanks :)
[+]
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3686
By Phoenix.Amandarius 2014-11-21 06:57:16
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way. You must not have read the same 3 pages I have.
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way.
Jet can't help flinging poo, its in his nature. Here you are talking about yourself again, I mean you are a dairy farmer. Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in?
Like I said earlier, I'll be happy to discuss the second chart as soon as we finish the current topic.
I'll recap since it's been a long day.
I provided you two different sources of data, that goes back 134 or so years, that shows the average global temperature have increased. You reply by saying you highly doubt those numbers are correct, and then casting doubt on an entirely different chart, one that covers several centuries and uses an entirely different methodology for its data.
If we can go back to the original topic at hand, what are your reasons for 'highly' doubting the data of the original two charts I provided, the ones that goes back 134-ish years.
I've tried to explain my rational a few times. I realize I suck at it, if I was good at relaying my thoughts into words Jet and Jassik would be out of a job.. Why don't you try and explain to me why I should believe that chart is accurate bedside's "scientist said so".
No rush, I'm going to bed right now. Somehow, I doubt that.
Don't you get tired of saying "No u" in different ways?
Eh don't worry about it. Some people hate themselves and venting on the internet is the only release they have. I feel bad for those people but more so for their children.
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2014-11-21 07:51:19
Several years from now we will be having this same argument on a parched desert landscape that used to be an ocean
I'll be all "I'll give you safe passage through the wasteland if you admit you were wrong about global warming!"
<defiant monkey screech noise> NO!! /boomerang
By fonewear 2014-11-21 07:59:50
"Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter..."
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-11-21 08:00:23
I thought global warming was supposed to make the oceans rise not dry up.
[+]
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2014-11-21 08:09:28
I thought global warming was supposed to make the oceans rise not dry up.
well in that case I'll be all... "I'll give you safe passage through the water way if you admit you were wrong about global warming!"
then you will make a dolphin noise and try to swim away
[+]
Leviathan.Chaosx
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-11-21 08:22:39
Quote: China and "one or two" other countries are capable of mounting cyberattacks that would shut down the electric grid and other critical systems in parts of the United States, according to Adm. Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency and head of U.S. Cyber Command.
The possibility of such cyberattacks by U.S. adversaries has been widely known, but never confirmed publicly by the nation's top cyber official.
At a hearing of the House intelligence committee, Rogers said U.S. adversaries are performing electronic "reconnaissance" on a regular basis so that they can be in a position to disrupt the industrial control systems that run everything from chemical facilities to water treatment plants.
"All of that leads me to believe it is only a matter of when, not if, we are going to see something dramatic," he said.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-11-21 08:38:04
/sigh
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2014-11-21 08:39:48
Phoenix.Amandarius said: »If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way. You must not have read the same 3 pages I have.
If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way.
Jet can't help flinging poo, its in his nature. Here you are talking about yourself again, I mean you are a dairy farmer. Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in?
Like I said earlier, I'll be happy to discuss the second chart as soon as we finish the current topic.
I'll recap since it's been a long day.
I provided you two different sources of data, that goes back 134 or so years, that shows the average global temperature have increased. You reply by saying you highly doubt those numbers are correct, and then casting doubt on an entirely different chart, one that covers several centuries and uses an entirely different methodology for its data.
If we can go back to the original topic at hand, what are your reasons for 'highly' doubting the data of the original two charts I provided, the ones that goes back 134-ish years.
I've tried to explain my rational a few times. I realize I suck at it, if I was good at relaying my thoughts into words Jet and Jassik would be out of a job.. Why don't you try and explain to me why I should believe that chart is accurate bedside's "scientist said so".
No rush, I'm going to bed right now. Somehow, I doubt that.
Don't you get tired of saying "No u" in different ways?
Eh don't worry about it. Some people hate themselves and venting on the internet is the only release they have. I feel bad for those people but more so for their children. Is this a personal confession?
Leviathan.Chaosx
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-11-21 09:06:11
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13638
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-21 09:44:51
Yes, let's. While admittedly, the clean energy industry still has a ways to go, do you not think we've made significant progress through all that research money? Do you think the multi-billion dollar industry is supported entirely by government tax dollars and they're not producing anything of real value? I just want to be clear on your stance.
I'm pretty sure I made my stance quite clear in previous posts today. No, I don't think that we have made enough progress given the amount of government money that has been handed over to the industry. I think it is has been corrupted by political motivations and has wasted too much money pointless projects. Do you need more clarification? Can you please give me the numbers and source you're referring to?
You mention the money angle a lot when discussing climate change research. Could you give those numbers you keep referring to, as well?
Since, frankly, I have no idea what you are referring to.
Edited to be more specific
Edit 2:
These are numbers I can find about clean tech. $77 billion from FY2008 to FY2013, 75% funded technology development through DOE.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43227.pdf
So, over $77 billion since 2008. Did you unintentionally just answer your own question or does that not sound like a lot of money to you for what we've gotten out of it?
Ragnarok.Nausi
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-11-21 09:46:33
The real term for the phenomena is global climate change. Increased temperature variability is to be expected.
Ah, so you "want your cake and eat it to". You can't fear monger the public with "OMG the global temp has risen 1-2 degrees" then say, Increased temperature variability is to be expected. When it starts trending the other way.
It's the last resource of a con-artist. When you expose the falsehood, they simply move the goal posts. Rank it up there with:
"If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor"
"Some may call it amnesty, it's not"
First it's getting colder so they'll call it "global cooling"
Next it gets warmer so they say "global warming"
Finally it gets cooler again so they call it "climate change"
Isn't the climate always changing?
Also they keep pointing to the "data" that favors their outcomes, when there's plenty to contradict it. It's how cons work. 
Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-11-21 09:52:26
Yes, let's. While admittedly, the clean energy industry still has a ways to go, do you not think we've made significant progress through all that research money? Do you think the multi-billion dollar industry is supported entirely by government tax dollars and they're not producing anything of real value? I just want to be clear on your stance.
I'm pretty sure I made my stance quite clear in previous posts today. No, I don't think that we have made enough progress given the amount of government money that has been handed over to the industry. I think it is has been corrupted by political motivations and has wasted too much money pointless projects. Do you need more clarification? Can you please give me the numbers and source you're referring to?
You mention the money angle a lot when discussing climate change research. Could you give those numbers you keep referring to, as well?
Since, frankly, I have no idea what you are referring to.
Edited to be more specific
Edit 2:
These are numbers I can find about clean tech. $77 billion from FY2008 to FY2013, 75% funded technology development through DOE.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43227.pdf
So, over $77 billion since 2008. Did you unintentionally just answer your own question or does that not sound like a lot of money to you for what we've gotten out of it?
So these are the numbers your referring to?
Because no, it's really not compared with oli & gas and nuclear financing/subsidies since inception.
Also, do you know what we've gotten out of it?
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13638
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-21 10:07:37
Yes, let's. While admittedly, the clean energy industry still has a ways to go, do you not think we've made significant progress through all that research money? Do you think the multi-billion dollar industry is supported entirely by government tax dollars and they're not producing anything of real value? I just want to be clear on your stance.
I'm pretty sure I made my stance quite clear in previous posts today. No, I don't think that we have made enough progress given the amount of government money that has been handed over to the industry. I think it is has been corrupted by political motivations and has wasted too much money pointless projects. Do you need more clarification? Can you please give me the numbers and source you're referring to?
You mention the money angle a lot when discussing climate change research. Could you give those numbers you keep referring to, as well?
Since, frankly, I have no idea what you are referring to.
Edited to be more specific
Edit 2:
These are numbers I can find about clean tech. $77 billion from FY2008 to FY2013, 75% funded technology development through DOE.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43227.pdf
So, over $77 billion since 2008. Did you unintentionally just answer your own question or does that not sound like a lot of money to you for what we've gotten out of it?
So these are the numbers your referring to?
Because no, it's really not compared with oli & gas and nuclear financing/subsidies since inception.
Also, do you know what we've gotten out of it?
You guys are hilarious. No, I do not have an itemized list on hand that details where every dollar has gone. You seem to be fine with your buddies making blanket statements about overspending when it comes to things Republicans like, but as soon as I question spending on climate change, it's all "Do you even know everything ever, bro?" I have not seen every number, but the numbers I have seen I am not impressed by. SCREW YOU RAV FOR HAVING AN OPINION.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-11-21 10:08:31
The agenda's in peril, must circle the wagons.
[+]
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2014-11-21 10:12:33
YOU DARE BRING AN OPINION INTO MY LAIR?!
YOU MUST DIE.
[+]
Random Politics & Religion is for topics that aren't thread worthy on their own and do not have their own existing thread.
Rules and Guidelines
Forum Rules and P&R Section Guidelines still apply.
Satire is tolerated.
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
Discussions on racism, homophobia, transphobia, and the like are allowed, targeted insults based on these will not be tolerated.
Political debates get heated and are meant to be intense, if you take offense to being called or proven wrong, you don't belong here.
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen; if you prove you can't handle the criticism you bring upon yourself in this thread, you may be removed from it. You are responsible for what you post.
Along those lines, heat is fine, but sustained, clearly personal hostility is not okay. The personal attack rules still apply. Attack positions, not posters. Failure to adhere to this will result in your removal from the thread.
This thread is NOT the Flame Core.
These rules are subject to change and modification where and when needed.
Random Politics & Religion may be mained or demained depending on the activity within at a Moderator's discretion.
With that out of the way, let the debates begin!
/bow
|
|
