Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Fweethawt

Humans on the verge of causing Earth’s fastest climate change in 50m years

65 posts in this topic

^^I am not saying EVERYTHING that comes out of those institutions is false, but rather how the individuals use the information and to what purpose, and to the level it is directed.  That is where the corruption comes in.  If there is gain to be had, it doesn't matter how smart or educated the individuals are, there are those who will use it to swindle the audience to whom it is ultimately directed, will even alter data to gain that advantage.  It is woven into narratives that come out in the end to be false.  What is even worse is when that faulty information is used to direct public policy, or some gate-keepers will restrict information because they have too much personally at stake with the status quo.  Thus, I may read about it, look at it, if it works, fine, but in the end, I cannot trust it just based on words alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Keeping this site online isn't free, so we need your support! Make a one-time donation or choose one of the recurrent patron options by clicking here.



Vested interests will always pervert the truth to their ends. That makes official government sources first to be suspect. Beyond that, I have a hard time seeing a world wide conspiracy of scientists faking things like archaeological records or climate data. It's rather easy to see, and there are documented examples, that fossil fuel interests lie about data. Both the pro fossil fuel and pro renewable energy backers are not averse to at least a little exaggeration, no? After all, some of the projections about the damage of climate change were quite overblown. The fossil fuel industry sweeps under the carpet any ecological concerns, and are often proven wrong. Overstating the case doesn't help believability for either. Still, there are facts to be found and your own conclusions to be drawn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Burnedout said:

Ya'll just don't get it.  I DO NOT TRUST the institutions the info comes out of...

Actually severs times you have claimed you don't SEE it. 

We are not in an ice age anymore! That is a climate that is changing. 

You don't have to trust anyone to know that climate change is occurring. It always has and always will change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jeff said:

Actually severs times you have claimed you don't SEE it. 

We are not in an ice age anymore! That is a climate that is changing. 

You don't have to trust anyone to know that climate change is occurring. It always has and always will change. 

 

This is so true. The only real contention here should be is the current warming trend exacerbated by human behavior? (Not "GW is bullshit, its not happening, I can't see it")

 

How much have humans affected the climate, can we do anything to slowdown/reverse our effect? These are the important questions.

 

Quibbling over Fort Pickens water level simply misses the big picture - if I can turn BO's nit picking claim around.

 

I hear you, yep politics is involved, maybe CO2 doesn't have the impact as suggested. But shit is happening with the climate, and people are already being affected, as is the animal kingdom.

 

I for one am glad the climate is not rapidly cooling - Ice ages are far worse than warm periods.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, florduh said:

Vested interests will always pervert the truth to their ends. That makes official government sources first to be suspect. Beyond that, I have a hard time seeing a world wide conspiracy of scientists faking things like archaeological records or climate data. It's rather easy to see, and there are documented examples, that fossil fuel interests lie about data. Both the pro fossil fuel and pro renewable energy backers are not averse to at least a little exaggeration, no? After all, some of the projections about the damage of climate change were quite overblown. The fossil fuel industry sweeps under the carpet any ecological concerns, and are often proven wrong. Overstating the case doesn't help believability for either. Still, there are facts to be found and your own conclusions to be drawn. 

 

You raise an interesting point, Florduh.

Not just with the above, but with your previous post too.

 

We don't have to and shouldn't trust everything at face value. What we can and must do is investigate and follow the preponderance of evidence. If we rely only on what our own eyes see (and even that's not reliable; ask any defense attorney) we allow ourselves to believe that the moon just might be suspended by wires since we can't see the forces at work. You can't be sure that Australia is where "they" say it is, or if it even exists for that matter. We may think the NASA space videos, and of course those from other countries such as Russia and China, might be faked for some nefarious global agenda. We remain in a perpetual state of denial and ignorance about the physical world not knowing anything.

 

I suspect, though, that even the most cynical and distrustful of us does in fact embrace things that are comfortable to believe, things that don't challenge our worldview. Many need no evidence at all to believe the world was created 6,000 years ago, yet they will not believe the evil scientists who know better. 

.

.

.

Here is the link for the Ministry of National Development...  http://app.mnd.gov.sg/  ...a branch of the government of Singapore.  (Selected randomishly, by me.)  As far as I can tell, this link has nothing to do with climate change or global warming.  Ok, so it's off-topic... and necessarily so for me, because I'm committed to not committing myself on that issue.  But please bear with me, ok?

 

Here's some questions I'd like to ask you.

 

Do you take the information on that site at face value?

 

Do you automatically trust it, because it's a government site?

 

If you are skeptical of it's content, how would you go about verifying that content for yourself?

 

At what point would you accept it's content as being trustworthy?

 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Here's some questions I'd like to ask you.

 

Do you take the information on that site at face value?

 

Do you automatically trust it, because it's a government site?

 

If you are skeptical of it's content, how would you go about verifying that content for yourself?

 

At what point would you accept it's content as being trustworthy?

 

 

What I read on that site seemed rather unremarkable. No scientific or political claims were made, and the recounting of history consisted of things such as, "communities have always grown up around rivers, rivers provide transportation and recreation, we plan to improve river access, we have built this, that and we plan to build this other..." I have no reason to challenge or investigate whatever "news" was published there. Perhaps if they claimed that the Japanese have parked six destroyers nine miles off their coastline then I would look to other sources that could observe and verify such a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, florduh said:

 

What I read on that site seemed rather unremarkable. No scientific or political claims were made, and the recounting of history consisted of things such as, "communities have always grown up around rivers, rivers provide transportation and recreation, we plan to improve river access, we have built this, that and we plan to build this other..." I have no reason to challenge or investigate whatever "news" was published there. Perhaps if they claimed that the Japanese have parked six destroyers nine miles off their coastline then I would look to other sources that could observe and verify such a thing.

 

Thanks Florduh.

 

Now let's see how BO answers the same set of questions about the Singapore Ministry of National Development.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Burnedout said:

^^I am not saying EVERYTHING that comes out of those institutions is false, but rather how the individuals use the information and to what purpose, and to the level it is directed.  That is where the corruption comes in.  If there is gain to be had, it doesn't matter how smart or educated the individuals are, there are those who will use it to swindle the audience to whom it is ultimately directed, will even alter data to gain that advantage.  It is woven into narratives that come out in the end to be false.  What is even worse is when that faulty information is used to direct public policy, or some gate-keepers will restrict information because they have too much personally at stake with the status quo.  Thus, I may read about it, look at it, if it works, fine, but in the end, I cannot trust it just based on words alone. 

 

Hi BO!

 

Would you please look at the information on this link... http://app.mnd.gov.sg/  ...and answer the following questions.  Thanks.

 

Do you take the information on that site at face value?

 

Do you automatically trust it, because it's a government site?

 

If you are skeptical of it's content, how would you go about verifying that content for yourself?

 

At what point would you accept it's content as being trustworthy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Do you take the information on that site at face value?

 

Answer...NO.  I may not have any beef with what they are saying, but I cannot be sure it is right or wrong.  

 

Quote

Do you automatically trust it, because it's a government site?

 

Answer...NO.  I don't generally trust government sites, though I am not saying everyone of them is necessarily 100% wrong either, I just cannot be sure which part is right and which is wrong. 

 

Quote

If you are skeptical of it's content, how would you go about verifying that content for yourself?

 

If it is not directly affecting me, and it is another country, I really don't care.  It is up to the people of that country's business, not mine.  

Quote


 

At what point would you accept it's content as being trustworthy?

 

 

First, it would have to be of some importance to me living my life.  Second, it it doesn't have a direct effect of how I live my life.  I may look at it and think...that's interesting, but it is none of my business.  So, in essence, since it has no bearing on my life, I really don't care to confirm it as long as it is staying within the borders of that country and not bothering me in my country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Burnedout said:

 

Answer...NO.  I may not have any beef with what they are saying, but I cannot be sure it is right or wrong.  

 

 

Answer...NO.  I don't generally trust government sites, though I am not saying everyone of them is necessarily 100% wrong either, I just cannot be sure which part is right and which is wrong. 

 

 

If it is not directly affecting me, and it is another country, I really don't care.  It is up to the people of that country's business, not mine.  

 

First, it would have to be of some importance to me living my life.  Second, it it doesn't have a direct effect of how I live my life.  I may look at it and think...that's interesting, but it is none of my business.  So, in essence, since it has no bearing on my life, I really don't care to confirm it as long as it is staying within the borders of that country and not bothering me in my country. 

 

Thank you, BO.

 

One further question, if I may.

 

Without leaving Pensacola, how do you ascertain if the activities of foreign governments, thousands of miles away, are directly affecting you?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

Thank you, BO.

 

One further question, if I may.

 

Without leaving Pensacola, how do you ascertain if the activities of foreign governments, thousands of miles away, are directly affecting you?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA. 

 

I don't nessarily.  I take a guess most of the time based on my understanding of human nature.  Sometimes, we are not privy to those explanations.  But then again, there are many things we are like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed bullshit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Burnedout said:

 

I don't nessarily.  I take a guess most of the time based on my understanding of human nature.  Sometimes, we are not privy to those explanations.  But then again, there are many things we are like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed bullshit. 

 

Hmmm... thanks.

 

So the basis of your evidence-free speculations about the nefarious activities of governments and institutions comes down to you guessing?

 

Guessing... based upon your understanding of human nature, not upon any actual evidence?

 

I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

Hmmm... thanks.

 

So the basis of your evidence-free speculations about the nefarious activities of governments and institutions comes down to you guessing?

 

Guessing... based upon your understanding of human nature, not upon any actual evidence?

 

I see.

 

 

Why not?  There is enough of a history of governments screwing people over and politicians on the take.  Anyone who has something to gain from politicians voting a certian way on a bill can and often does make deals with said politicians.  Not entirely speculation.  

 

My understanding of human nature is based on my observation of human nature.  People, if they see a way to get ahead and there is not a reasonble chance of them getting caught, can and often do nefarious things to acheieve that gain.  Do you see a flaw in your opinion in my estimation?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1 hour ago, bornagainathiest said:

 

Hmmm... thanks.

 

So the basis of your evidence-free speculations about the nefarious activities of governments and institutions comes down to you guessing?

 

Guessing... based upon your understanding of human nature, not upon any actual evidence?

 

I see.

 

 

Why not?  There is enough of a history of governments screwing people over and politicians on the take.  Anyone who has something to gain from politicians voting a certian way on a bill can and often does make deals with said politicians.  Not entirely speculation.  

 

My understanding of human nature is based on my observation of human nature.  People, if they see a way to get ahead and there is not a reasonble chance of them getting caught, can and often do nefarious things to acheieve that gain.  Do you see a flaw in your opinion in my estimation? 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Why not guess?

Because I prefer to know the facts and examine the evidence and use them to draw my conclusions, BO.  

I prefer not to base my conclusions on guesswork and evidence-free speculations, driven solely or largely by my understanding of human nature.

That understanding is a work in progress and probably will remain say until my dying day.

People surprise me, catch me out and wrong foot me all the time.

So my understanding of them is a very poor basis for me to guess, speculate or extrapolate about what they might be doing..

:shrug:

.

.

.

Ummm...sorry, but I don't quite understand this question, BO.   "Do you see a flaw in your opinion in my estimation?"

 

Are you asking if I see a flaw in my own opinion?  (Which one?)

 

Or are you asking if my opinion of your estimation (of human nature?) is flawed?

 

Sorry to be obtuse.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^Never mind.  I asked the questions on the fly and didn't quite think it through.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0