Politics
Politics
Out of context: Reply #23261
- Started
- Last post
- 33,468 Responses
- whatthefunk4
- Somethings will never absorb into the minds of these delicate snowflakes.utopian
- it isn't about gw but u know "science bitch":
https://en.wikipedia…sted - Wrong! Tthe industrial age actually began around 1760.omg
- Next time a denier says the science agrees that man isn't contributing to client change, ask for them to explain and watch the stupidity ensue.monospaced
- Haha. Client change. Derp.monospaced
- http://thefederalist…deathboy
- thats my beef, its not so much science as is its models on data points that should take a little lesson from karl popperdeathboy
- climate modelers are much like wallstreet models using data of past observations for to predict future trades, usually all very short sighted and wrongdeathboy
- and than throw in the market forces behind these models. who pays for them? they're not free. And we wonder how much model is bias, and for whom.deathboy
- the science of data models, get a sad chuckle out of medeathboy
- models about the future are problematic, of course, but you cannot deny the science based on the past, correct? Hence, trend...whatthefunk
- yeah those greedy scientists! screw them!inteliboy
- fuck those fat cat obnoxious scientists in their rich mansions whoring their bullshit data models! assholes.inteliboy
- like the ice core data that seems to show trends on 100k cycles? yea i'd say we are probably in one of those warming trends which will eventually peakdeathboy
- and we'll come down on the cooling side. and we will adapt or die, sure humans play a role but i think our role is over evaluated, and i think ppl aredeathboy
- mainly using the fear for profit, and i question the expenses and harm this fear has vs real climate changesdeathboy
- i think one must always be skeptical on this topic because it is so easy to take advantage of b/c the way ppl have been taught to think about itdeathboy
- and also ppl need to think of relative scale. we could be talking cycles were are lives are but a blink. theories of pole reversals, and solar system phenomenadeathboy
- It doesn't give you any pause to consider that every single person on the planet who studies this for a living completely disagrees with you?monospaced
- most current stuff just reminds me of jim kramer and followers seem to follow on blind faith. like cant challenge or ask. maybe this fascination is just a trenddeathboy
- Hopefully this anti-progress thing is just a trend, the final 'peak' now and then they all dieformed
- you use the phrase "I think" twice: “Belief is a very peculiar thing: we tend to put more store in a belief we like than a fact we hate”whatthefunk
- I find it humorous that I felt the best place for a climate post was in a politics thread - a sad truth nowadays...whatthefunk
- and btw, mono - client change is an equally devastating trend that needs to be curbed "I think the logo should be bigger..." ;)whatthefunk
- it's astonishing the amount of people who seem to be climate experts, or decide the way they feel or believe about the matter is what counts.inteliboy
- "don't worry guise, I looked into it" - every climate change denier.inteliboy
- i think is more important than i feel. and it doesnt surpise me u posted in politics at all because it justifies my point its more political than realdeathboy
- its more ideology instead of science. more feelers than truth. do u think we are in a warming cycle that existed before humans what?deathboy
- or do u prefer to believe the humans created the cycles?deathboy
- and @mono start thinking for yourselfdeathboy
- everyone in nazi germany knew jews were terrible mono. it was the popular belief. Same with the world is flat. start thinking for yourself based on reasondeathboy
- or u know @what explain to me how climate scientists are not the same as jim cramer econ scientists. what makes them different?deathboy
- doesn't sound like you're interested in the facts, so what's the point of a debate here?inteliboy
- Seriously. These aren't predictions these are actual measurements. I AM thinking for myself but I'm not ignoring the facts like some people.monospaced
- And comparing stock performance predictions to climate change scientists is beyond stupid. You've already shown how you don't understand the markets at all.monospaced
- The only reason climate change is political AT ALL is because religious alt right jerks keep denying it in favor of fossil fuel and prayer.monospaced
- Politicians are lobbying against renewable energy and climate change science because it kills profits and goes against gods plan. Keep religion out of politics.monospaced
- So we are equating the reporting of climate change with nazi propaganda against a people? *slow clap* Fuck you, deathboy. Fuck you until your eyes bleed.face_melter
- ^ indeed.fadein11
- Flat Earther's Uniteutopian
- The climate changes all the time. I'm still for clean energy and self-driving cars for the future.omg
- ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ guess some ppl cant even think outside what they belief. and face don't get hsotile it was just a defense against a argumentum ad populum statementdeathboy
- perhaps if any of you are involved in media, you can think of it as analytics, how you report growth to a client, how you choose to frame your bias.deathboy
- Humans ruin everything, I wish things were better like in the past.robotron3k
- and mono are u blind to all the lobbying for green energy for pure profit. u think they're doing it for anything else?deathboy
- and market predictions and climate predictions are a lot a like. if you say they're not can u explain why not.deathboy
- Deniers gonna denyutopian
- 'the models' as you try and accuse are actually very simple —
more heat in system = more energy = bad weather + ocean rise + acidifcation.detritus - the complexity and unassuredness only comes from models which try to repeatedly predict the future, but even they are not massively in question, by consensus.detritus
- but can a simple model be worth a damn for complex systems? id say no. But if it supported my financial aims id say yes.deathboy
- just an example if you build a model on a mean temperature of 3-5 years in a single area, do you ignore factors that may distort the mean, or is it a global meadeathboy
- n, do we simply take a 5-10 yr mean and compare to previous 20 year avg. its so complex. we likely cant tell if billions spent have done a single thing, anddeathboy
- im guessing that thing we ultimately want is to stop climate change which is a fictional thing like heaven. so many parallels with today's science & religiondeathboy
