The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[freebeard]

Why are you a communist sympathizer?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor
Learn to be more empathetic.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor
Learn to be more empathetic.

Exactly why recently people are feeling The Bern. He might be wrong about a great many things, but his intentions aren't evil. People are willing to set aside reason when they meet authenticity.

Anyhow, I'd have aerohead over any time, so maybe that makes me a communist sympathizer by proxy.

[freebeard]

According to oil pan 4, maybe.

Exactly why recently people are feeling The Bern. He might be wrong about a great many things, but his intentions aren't evil.

Poor Bernie, a millionare that has to beg for money.

Polls say 25% of the people who would otherwise vote for him say they will vote for President Trump if their not given the choice. (I've always said used to say the two aren't that far apart) Those are the voters.

OTOH Project Veritasium has been exposing the people whove infiltrated his organization who are ready to make 'cities burn' if he doesn't get the nomination. Those are the people behind him.

Consequently I would look very closely at the pick for Veep, who will be one more heart attack away from the Presidency.

I'm also watching to see if Meghan Markle can move ex-Prince Harry from Vancouver to LA, where the divorce laws are copacetic. Has she had a marriage last more than two years yet?

[redneck]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I haven't seen peer-reviewed scientific reports which attribute solar forcing to cloud formation.The Danish tried to make a case,but when sulfate aerosols were added to the climate models in the late 1990s,there wasn't any need for a competing theory for global warming.Radiometer data was flawed at the time.The discrepancy between greenhouse gases and global temperatures finally 'fit.' There was no need to look at the stars, or cloud condensation nuclei,or anything else to explain warming.It wasn't clouds.It wasn't solar wind.It wasn't cosmic particles or secondary particles.

I posted this before but nobody commented on it.

Maybe it was to long for the attention span of those in this thread...

Anyway, there’s this guy.

Physicist Freeman Dyson.

Maybe you heard of him?

He’s some smuck from the Institute of Advanced Study in Princeton.

From his study on Co2 and his limited understanding of science and access to unfettered data from others in the field of climate research.

He thinks that...

Computer models do a good job of helping us understand climate but they do a very poor job of predicting it.

That cosmic energy does effect our clouds and therefore our climate.

That our climate is very complex and not controlled by any one thing.(Co2)

That greening of the world in general, is a good and positive thing.

And that the positives out weigh the negatives...

Dyson says, As measured from space, the whole earth is growing greener as a result of carbon dioxide, so it’s increasing agricultural yields, it’s increasing the forests and it’s increasing growth in the biological world, and that’s more important and more certain than the effects on climate.

He acknowledges that human activity has an effect on climate but claims it is much less than is claimed. He stresses the non-climate benefits of carbon are overwhelmingly favourable.

But all that is from some old man...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BQHhDxRuTkI

>

[redpoint5]

Although I don't follow politics, there's a certain amount absorbed through osmosis. I had the impression at the last election that Bern and Don were similar in that they don't hold back their opinion. They come as advertised and make no apologies about it.

I don't know who Meghan is. Based on the context, I'd guess governor of BC.

I've heard snippets of Veritasium and I don't let it color my opinion too much of the "typical" Bernie supporter. You interview enough people in any camp, and you're bound to find some crazies, especially if your aim is to find them.

Sure, Bernie has a certain (large) amount of cognitive dissonance to maintain his concept of how communism has will work out, but he's simply tapping into an observation that Prager brings up; that the natural inclination of people is to be taken care of. You find many willing to surrender liberty and freedom in exchange for not having to be responsible for their actions. Prager brings up the story of the Israelites fleeing Egyption slavery, and then immediately thinking fondly of how nice it was being "taken care of" as slaves in Egypt. I get this and it makes total sense. There are aspects of prison that are appealing to me because it drastically simplifies living. You don't have to think about what to wear or how to buy it, what to eat or how to prepare it, when to wake up or go to bed... with difficult decisions all made for you, it leaves a few freedoms to intensely focus on. I chose working out, reading, and engaging in deep discussion to focus on, and I still miss all of those things. The thing is, there's no future in prison, and likewise, there's no future in communism.

The Israelites had to "wander" for 40 years before they adapted to taking responsibility for themselves. I wonder if it will take a similar amount of time for the Russians to get it together? Freedom doesn't automatically create prosperity, it merely leaves that as an option.

Anyhow, that's the double-edge sword of power and authority, even over oneself, that it also conveys an equal measure of responsibility. Being responsible is terrifying because that means things that don't work out are your fault. It's perfectly understandable to think a group of well regarded people know how to run my life better than me, especially if I'm particularly bad at it.

[freebeard]

His daughter did well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Dyson

Although I don't follow politics, there's a certain amount absorbed through osmosis. I had the impression at the last election that Bern and Don were similar in that they don't hold back their opinion. They come as advertised and make no apologies about it.

That's the authenticity you talked about.

I don't know who Meghan is. Based on the context, I'd guess governor of BC.

She married Harry and they have a kid.

I've seen snippets of Veritasium and I don't let it color my opinion too much of the "typical" Bernie supporter. You interview enough people in any camp, and you're bound to find some crazies, especially if your aim is to find them.

The supporters are't the problem. It's the organizers that are lining up behind him that concern me.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

His daughter did well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Dyson

That's the authenticity you talked about.

She married Harry and they have a kid.

The supporters are't the problem. It's the organizers that are lining up behind him that concern me.

Lol, that'd be my second guess as to who Meghan is. As much as I don't follow politics here, I'm even less exposed to Canadian politics. Last thing I think I remember is a woman was running against a man for governor of BC. Couldn't remember if her name was Meghan or...

Anyhow, I figure the organizers behind any major political figure are probably verging on devout fanatics of "the cause". You'll get people like me who think borders should be secured, because there's nothing that defines a nation more than the physical boundaries and adherence to the laws within. Then you get others who just don't like brown people. My guess is enough interviews with organizers behind a Trump campaign would reveal some in the latter camp with regard to "build the wall".

All that said, my WAG is that extreme positions are currently more accepted by the mainstream left than extreme positions are accepted by the mainstream right.

If I had to distill the libertarian (and to a lesser extent conservatives) vs authoritarian (and to a lesser extent liberals) mindset into the simplest thought, it would probably be that libertarians value the option to prosper more than being protected from failure. Authoritarians value safety from catastrophe more than freedom to prosper. Somewhere between the extremes is probably a healthy balance.

[freebeard]

I came back to point out it is of course Project Veritas, not Veritasium.

You'll get people like me who think borders should be secured, because there's nothing that defines a nation more than the physical boundaries and adherence to the laws within. Then you get others who just don't like brown people. My guess is enough interviews with organizers behind a Trump campaign would reveal some in the latter camp with regard to "build the wall".

They should learn to like brown people. Mexico isn't paying for the wall, Mexico IS the wall.

'If I had to distill the libertarian (and to a lesser extent conservatives) vs authoritarian (and to a lesser extent liberals) mindset into the simplest thought, it would probably be ...' that it's a two dimensional field not a spectrum. Center/center is a position, not a refusal to take a stand. On some bogus jump-scare issue.

One of the persons Project Veritas platformed said something that equated Antifa and the Yellow Vests. That right there is someone without the mental space to accommodate the anarchist left and anarchist right in a single gestalt.

[redneck]

.

Highest-resolution photo of the sun ever taken.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...un-ever-taken/



>

[freebeard]

Just A Car Guy: yup, that's about right