The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I'm trying to bait someone into providing evidence that prior IPCC reports have given good enough prediction of events that transpired that we can have increased faith that current/future reports are likely to be accurate.

I'm in the middle of watching this(actually, listening to it in the background). Focus on 15:10 and later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX2MOlAD9jM

I don't find objecting to subjectivity to be entirely pointless.

It was a[n objective/subjective] joke.

But the point was that subjectivity is what you get when a neural net observes a quantum field. To quote Todd Snider "Let all them people do what people do..." The correct response is to point and laugh.

Originally Posted by All Darc

People accept religion varies and varies in a same religion from time to time. In theory, for example opoes would be as intermediary to God, but if they change so much over time, it's cleary they couldn't, unless their God was a ping pong ball withouty any coherence.

If you follow Carl Jung or Joseph Campbell, the same themes or archetypes bubble up out of the human subconscious repeatedly over the ages.

No matter... people are irational and just follows what they was treaned to follow, used to... Critical coherent thinking it's a menace for the world structure of power and domain. And when people think in something, usually it's just sh..., like the flat Earth moviment and others.

The Flat-Earthers are an interesting case. A psy-op obviously, but if you poke at it it bites pokes back. Now they're being use as a conduit to spread a novel flavor of historical revisionism. It's both questionable and question-raising.

Every psy-op requires ~10% truth to sell the rest. What's the nugget in this? Antiquitech? It was 189x-1752 years from Ben Franklin's kite to Tesla's AC hegemon over atmospheric power.

[niky]

Originally Posted by sendler

degrowth

Unfortunately, admitting that this is necessary for the long term survival of the species is not a good way to get the popular vote.

Hell, telling people they need to pay for their pollution can get you in hot water.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

If one person doesn't conform to this behavior,then your premise falls apart.
If you have a statistical representation of the distribution of city slickers observed to do nothing,then you've got a useful metric for your argument.
The exception proves the rule.

I have only ever been able to find a dozen or so that have put up solar panels, drive electric vehicles and live some what green, the vast overwhelming majority are as I stated.

[All Darc]

People are also a disgrace !

They are used to be fooled (smile by front view and stable by back) by politician and by consumism media, and both these fields never blame the people (consumer/voters) but butter up/flatered them to make easier to steal.
People are like the naked king imagining his clothes are invisible. They think they are right and not guilty for nothing. Plus the victmism ideology of today...

I say : Fu...k the people too. Let's point the finger to people, to consumers, to voter, as they deserve.
They are also responsible for the disgrace of the world.

Sorry for the many typing mistakes of the earlier post. Fast typing... I will fix now.

Originally Posted by niky

Unfortunately, admitting that this is necessary for the long term survival of the species is not a good way to get the popular vote.

Hell, telling people they need to pay for their pollution can get you in hot water.

[All Darc]

This "home water treatment" in this video it's even more suspicious, since instead of use farm water from ground holes and then mixed with water collected from toiled pot (without poop inside), he took the sewage water from dead river direct, and after the simple treatment.
He used a similar treatment to the one from the other video, but instead of chlorine for the last stage (after aglutination and very simple filtering) he used a organic compound. Disolved solids were not removed.

And the water in the spheric jar didn't got very transparent with this treatment, unly it's my impression just.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWw-OEu8LP0

This approuch have value compared to when poor people have no alternative at all, but it's far from safe. Poor people can't pay lab tests each time.
Heavy metals and pesticides were not removed.

But I wonder why home can't have a simple system to treat sewage like that, to allow to collect solids and water up to back to nature nearly harmless. It would be more practical than Bill Gates's eco toilet. Just a large box (tank) with impermeabilization, some moving blade to mix slowly and to separate solids after aglutination get ready, and a small output filter.
Unles the aglutination agent it's expensible, this would be viable for third world.

Other alternative it's use tanks (like pools) with a lot of plants up to take the organic residues direct from water. But this require quite lage tanks and a lot of plants.

Originally Posted by All Darc

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by All Darc

They are used to be fooled (smile by front view and stable by back) by politician and by consumism media, and both these fields never blame the people (consumer/voters) but butter up/flatered them to make easier to steal.

I don't know what advertisements look like where you live, but in the US nearly every advertisement has the message "you deserve this".

Nearly everyone here has that mentality, that the world owes them something.

[freebeard]

I was at the bus stop, waiting, and a guy was pacing back and forth talking on his phone about HIV Alliance. He paced toward me stopped, and before he turned around said distinctly "I have special privileges because I have an illness."

[All Darc]

But it was what I tried to say. Media and politics smile to you at front face (face to face, but stables by the back. Both act like if people rules, if people was important, but in reality they just manipulate people.

People think the world owes them something, but in reality they eat in the hand of media and politics.
That's why I said someone should say F... The People, blame people too, since people also have guilty on this since it's their vanity and arrogance the doors from where the manipulation starts. I'm not saying to cut peoples's rights or anyting like that, but just to blame people when they deserves, blame the stupidity, the selfish, the arrogance, the prejudice, and starts to point the finger to the disgusting side of the culture people have right in the depths of their minds.

And thinks like Uncle Jordan quotes, somehow (not direct- so it's easy for hin to say that never said tis or that) fight it for one side, in terms of money, but for the sexual side sometimes gives the impression women owes someting to man, like when he made severe critics to hipergamia, like nearly suggesting it should be forbiden because many man should end with no women while women had many guys but in general the selection of guys, the few guys that get most women . His idea it's like p...zzy socialism. Crazy.
He can have great moments as orator, but in other moments he scares.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I don't know what advertisements look like where you live, but in the US nearly every advertisement has the message "you deserve this".

Nearly everyone here has that mentality, that the world owes them something.

[All Darc]

21 century... when people manipulate suposed weakness to domain things.
On TV once there was a debate about borderline personality disorder, and the funny thing is that a girl (20's) with such disorder (that leads to casual explosions of angryness) talked like she had the right to get such upset for nothing and that the people around that should manage it because she was a sick person. What the helll... She didn't said direct, but the way she talked sounded arrogant to me, like she didn't wanted to take responsability for her acts.
If she was humble and had said that was difficult to deal with the disorder, and people could try to forgive her when she apologize for someting, I could understand a bit. But the arrogant way she talked, ohh crap...

And this things are getting spread. If it's not with skin color, social class, gender, sexual orientation, it's about some disturb someone have. Once it start and people see other using some privilege over something they have, they will feel need to compete to get someting too, and we will have a society where everyone will try to use someting to get some benefit.

Originally Posted by freebeard

I was at the bus stop, waiting, and a guy was pacing back and forth talking on his phone about HIV Alliance. He paced toward me stopped, and before he turned around said distinctly "I have special privileges because I have an illness."

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by All Darc

...blame people too, since people also have guilty on this since it's their vanity and arrogance the doors from where the manipulation starts. I'm not saying to cut peoples's rights or anyting like that, but just to blame people when they deserves, blame the stupidity, the selfish, the arrogance, the prejudice, and starts to point the finger to the disgusting side of the culture people have right in the depths of their minds.

And thinks like Uncle Jordan quotes, somehow (not direct- so it's easy for hin to say that never said tis or that) fight it for one side, in terms of money, but for the sexual side sometimes gives the impression women owes someting to man, like when he made severe critics to hipergamia, like nearly suggesting it should be forbiden because many man should end with no women while women had many guys but in general the selection of guys, the few guys that get most women . His iea it's like p...zzy socialism. Crazy.
He can have great moments as orator, but in other moments he scares.

We do collectively get what we collectively deserve. Look at the presidential candidates we entertain and elect in the US. Like trying to decide which disease we'd least mind having.

I'm still waiting for you to produce something from Peterson that should scare me. From everything I've heard, he's merely pointing out how things are, not necessarily justifying those things.

Concerning availability of women to men; women rate 80% of men as below average attractiveness. They literally perceive most men to be below average, so it seems to reason that the few remaining men viewed as attractive would get more attention.

It doesn't seem fair to me, but nature doesn't seem to be concerned with fairness.

BTW, men rate women with a normal distribution at 50%, meaning they view the average woman to be exactly at the average level of attractiveness.