Politics
Politics
Out of context: Reply #26534
- Started
- Last post
- 33,475 Responses
- utopian4
- what is a scientist focused on world improvement with 0 knowledge of economics and free markets? perhaps a failed dictator?deathboy
- after all the paris climate accord has little to do with real science anyways. if you look at every single carbon model you will find it has been proven falsedeathboy
- the hubris that we are somehow all wise or at least someone else is and can solve all problems... god manifested into "science"deathboy
- so why did the rest of the planet sign this accord? USA included?uan
- Economics is a social science.lowimpakt
- signed it for politics and individual gain wether money or power or status. same reason everyone does stuff.deathboy
- more than anything a fictious symbol of fools like having children sing the pedge of allegiencedeathboy
- and i like to think of economics as more of a philosophy. Social science can study the economic philsophies of cultures. venezuala vs hongkongdeathboy
- Economies are ever different by the way one perceives the world and value. Im not even sure there is "science" to it. it is to organic and relativedeathboy
- You can think that if you like but it's actually a social science.lowimpakt
- that's a bold judgement against the rest of humanity.uan
- why no government has been successful at steering economies. its like ever changing cancerdeathboy
- you are assigning the value of a social science and i am not. how does that fair with your view of economies vs minedeathboy
- "why no government has been successful at steering economies" eh?inteliboy
- how do you define success in economics? more endless gain for the few rich ppl? abolish poverty? peace?uan
- uan i make bold judgements. ill back it with plenty of evidence by researching parties involved. altruism is a lie. Sold by the right religious picked up by thedeathboy
- left eliteistsdeathboy
- its all spectacle for politic posturing at the whims of the best lobbyists who influenced the most. the goals of it will never be met, but it gives leveragedeathboy
- for policy. think why we would need an accord in the first place? why cant we go alone? what benefit us in a group? you soon see realitydeathboy
- you are assuming I take a side here, instead I was just trying to make you think about your the opinion you are trying to defend.uan
- it's ridiculous to think protection of the environment is against free markets. also your guy is fighting free market economics with protectionism.uan
- Economics sits within the department of social science in most universitieslowimpakt
- uan you are mistaken he is my guy. Protecting environments has nothing to do with free markets. the market determines the level of protection that serves itsdeathboy
- interests. there is no free market if you assign arbitrary value and rules on the whim of environmental studies. again diesal in the USdeathboy
- Low. funny i was builidng out a course study for australia where surfing was a class and Lyon a photography. I think of universities as car dealershipsdeathboy
- So that circular reasoning doesnt work for me. But again "perception of value" which is what drives all economiesdeathboy
- The carbon model has not been proven false though.monospaced
- Also we don't have free markets. We have subsidised interests.lowimpakt
- deathboy likes to claim that global warming isn't real but he provides no basis for that. just look at all the nonsense he's written so far.dorf
- seriouslymonospaced
- I've heard his refrain, almost word for word, predictable and angsty from other Trump supporters. It's like they all believe every word Trump says.monospaced
- They ignore the fact that 2 seconds after withdrawing, he's talking about getting back in, and defend it like mindless warriors fighting the cause for stupid.monospaced
- dorf. clearly i believe in climate change. im just not daft enough to think we can stop it.deathboy
- so you don't think we as a species are to blame at all?monospaced
- i think we have an impact, i dont think we have any real idea of how to measure our impact. you do know how the data models work right?deathboy
- take the stock market for example. small in comparison to global climate. plenty of stock models and predictions with a ton of datadeathboy
- and hardly is it correct, global climate has even less data and more spaced out. buoys in the ocean in 9000mi radius. old farm data with huge margin of errordeathboy
- and not one data model from the "scientist" data modelers proven accurate. think about what what it is they are tryign to prove or predictdeathboy
- its so much money wasted chasing a rainbow that we are really powerless to change, but i guess it makes moneydeathboy
- there really is a problem in the world with terms like "expert", "scientist". How many brand experts in your office are full of shit? Why is everyone and expertdeathboy
- because its easy to hide behind a substitute term. Makes you stop thinking. I mentioned in blog i almost fell into that trap buying a used cardeathboy
- relied a KBB to dictate a value thinking they were the experts, so much easier to substitute others expertness than thinkingdeathboy
- not sure where you heard that the science isn't accurate, but the claim that they've all proven false is .. .well ... false.monospaced
- I think the idea that you consider yourself more in the know than the last 100 years of experts is laughably ridiculous, and incredibly hypocritical.monospaced
- haha im not an expert. and averaging data means is math not science. and its hindsight math, why no models produced have been accuratedeathboy
- its important to know what you don't know for real learnin. which model do you prefer mono? probably don't even know one, and yet you believedeathboy
- I never claimed to be an expert either, I wouldn't be so naive. But I do know people who have dedicated their lives to the sciences, including energy.monospaced
- and climate ... and I do trust them. You're right, I don't know the models either, I'll give you that.monospaced
- yea people try to have faith in what they don't know, its human. The problem is disinformation leads people to think these scientists are of the empirical kinddeathboy
- think 30 years ago people would likely say well i dont know, now people say i know because i was told. culture is changingdeathboy
- or maybe its gods are changing. bible followers were told. always have said religious right and far left are cut from the same cloth, just matter of following adeathboy
- 30 years ago it was just as bad. Making presumptions worse having faith in those people who actually KNOW what they're talking about, btw.monospaced
- *is worse thanmonospaced
- present vs non present omnipotent good seeking being.deathboy
- "yea people try to have faith in what they don't know, its human." how ironic. "its important to know what you don't know for real learnin." lol!!dorf
- dorf would u like to make an adult statement?deathboy
- I get funny if you don't understand it. But i cant see it being funny if you understand it. Ill be happy to walk you through any misunderstandingsdeathboy
- and mono i dont see how making rational argument against "those in the KNOW" is a bad thing. And i retain 30 years ago it was different. media is differentdeathboy
- too much generic disinformation giving assured opinions on topics they know nothing about. like you said you are so sure yet know nothingdeathboy
- no model you agree with or reason, just you have friends in science and they think so so u agree... remebr when your parents said if everyon jumped off a bridgedeathboy
- i think people 30 years ago were more honest because they didnt have pressure to know or not. not tied to identity. culture was entirely differentdeathboy
- the global cooling crowd an eco movement were fringe, misinformed "scientists" but had the hell ring to make money.deathboy
- now a days any one who reads a 5 minutes article from a "expert" acts like they're an expert. never challenging their own views or expandind upon themdeathboy