Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Doomsday cometh
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 9:54 pm Post subject:

Julius wrote:

visitorq wrote:

It's called being skeptical instead of just internalizing all the meaningless

Being skeptical is one thing, but when you permanently commit to one viewpoint and automatically wave away all evidence to the contrary, then you are basically on the road to madness.

I don't wave away actual, compelling evidence (of which you have provided none)... but I do wave away the baseless conclusions and made up lies espoused by proven liars (on record) who have a massive multi-billion dollar agenda and have been wrong about everything they've ever predicted.

Quote:

This is why it is pointless to debate with you because there is nothing that could have any effect. You have coccooned yourself in some fantasy world wherein you are the hero, battling deception and everyone else are dumb sheeple.

Right back at ya. You're as stubborn as a mule. Literally no amount of debunking and pointing out how wrong you are would ever change your mind. You'll just dig your heels in further (like the other thread where you defend the merits of factory farms, just to keep up your bogus argument that the West is some sort of animal-rights utopia compared to evil, animal-hating Korea)... Nothing I post will change your mind - therefore I debunk the lies phony conclusions you draw for the benefit of anyone else perusing the thread.

Quote:

So I'll just leave you to your bubble.

And I'll just leave you to Al Gore. Maybe if you make-believe hard enough and pay your carbon tithe like a good little slave, he'll wave his magic wand and miraculously fix everything. And maybe when the 150 foot rise in sea levels occurs, he'll simply part the water (Moses-style) and his $9 million ocean front mansion will be spared! Hallelujah Rolling Eyes

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:41 am Post subject:

Julius wrote:

visitorq wrote:

It's called being skeptical instead of just internalizing all the meaningless

Being skeptical is one thing, but when you permanently commit to one viewpoint and automatically wave away all evidence to the contrary, then you are basically on the road to madness.

.

So when you waved away my link which had evidence of temperature data tampering...what you do think you were doing?

Stout

Joined: 28 May 2011

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 4:25 am Post subject:

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/hawaiinews/20110721_Plentiful_Pacific_trash_proves_shocking___to_canoe_voyagers.html The flotilla of double-hulled sailing canoes that left the Hawaiian Islands more than a week ago has encountered masses of rubbish floating in the northeastern Pacific. Capt. Johnathan Smith, aboard the Fijian canoe Uto Ni Yalo, said they have been passing through so much rubbish that it's difficult to keep a list of it in the log. "That's how much rubbish is out here," Smith wrote on the vessel's blog. "It is shocking here in the North Pacific."

Julius

Joined: 27 Jul 2006

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 4:36 am Post subject:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

So when you waved away my link which had evidence of temperature data tampering...what you do think you were doing?

I believe that some scientists may have presented some evidence with a certain bias, yes.

However you have taken the exception and claimed it is the rule. You seem to be fond of doing this.

Sorry but the evidence for climate change is overwhelming and it comes from tens of thousands of unconnected scientists, sources, and lines of evidence.

Is climate change driven by human activity? To anyone with the bigger picture it should seem instantly obvious that yes, it must be. It must be. Because climate changes correspond, co-incide and match human activities like industrialisation, human population growth, destruction of ecosystems, tampering and alteration of natural environments.

if you cannot see that then you are very likely an urban city deller who does not really know anything about the natural world, and sees everything as human-centred and in purely political terms.

So I believe that we are undergoing potentially dangerous climate change, and that it is largely human caused.

But what to do? Should we impose carbon taxes? Should we wait until the evidence is so undeniable that it is too late to do anything to remedy the situation?
Should we try and force humans to take care of the planet? or just let everyone do what they want and hope for the best?

It should be obvious, obvious, that the human population is too high now. There are more people alive now than have ever lived. This would not be a problem if we were living sustainably on the earth, but we aren't. We are laying waste to the planet. Consuming, polluting, exploiting, changing, harming the earths natural operating systems. Mostly for short-term profit. Those, like VisitorQ who want the human population to go on increasing forever are living in a fantasy land. We're at 7 billion now, where does he suggest drawing the line?. Freedom as an abstract principle for humanity must surely include also responsibility. VisitorQ doesn't seem to think so.
Personally I have zero objection to paying more taxes, taking fewer flights, not owning a car etc if it is genuinely helping to protect the earths ecosystems. That does not amount to "government controlling every facet of our lives", it amounts to consideration for the planet and environment.

Is there an "evil conspiracy" by the illuminati to benefit from imposing carbon taxes? Who knows? possibly. VisitorQ is very far from proving this however.
If protecting the planet is a conspiracy among the ruling elite, that does not mean that it is the wrong thing to do.
Supplying immunisation jabs to the children of the third world has been a conspiacy among aid agencies for decades. Pharmaceutical companies have made fortunes out of it. Does that mean its wrong?

Privateer

Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 5:33 am Post subject:

It really is depressing that we have vast problems in the world, everyone knows about them, there are plenty of ideas on how to solve them, and virtually no one in any of our governments is doing a damn thing about them. It seems like, in the words of Fred Reed, 'there are no adults'. Not in the leadership, anyway.

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 6:26 am Post subject:

Julius wrote:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

So when you waved away my link which had evidence of temperature data tampering...what you do think you were doing?

I believe that some scientists may have presented some evidence with a certain bias, yes.

However you have taken the exception and claimed it is the rule. You seem to be fond of doing this.

?

Except that was just ONE of the MANY examples found in the 50+ page climate thread which was chosen because of the relevance to what I was responding to.

Sorry but you don't get to pass GO and collect $200 this turn.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 6:53 am Post subject:

Privateer wrote:

It really is depressing that we have vast problems in the world, everyone knows about them, there are plenty of ideas on how to solve them, and virtually no one in any of our governments is doing a damn thing about them.

Actually most of our problems are caused by the government in the first place, and often deliberately. It's only natural that things will not get better as long as people keep expecting gov't "authorities" (really just a mafia posing as government) to fix everything.

Quote:

It seems like, in the words of Fred Reed, 'there are no adults'. Not in the leadership, anyway.

There are adults - you just wouldn't know it to watch the mass media or by listening to scripted speeches read by politicians off of teleprompters... They talk to us like we're children (and often act stupid themselves, like the case of the previous president Bush); unfortunately such a large segment of the public is so dumbed-down at this point that they may as well be...

(actually I take it back... labeling people childish who have such an utterly insurmountable lack of discernment, like ya-ta boy and his Obamanoid ilk, is an insult to children)

Last edited by visitorq on Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:02 am; edited 1 time in total

Julius

Joined: 27 Jul 2006

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:01 am Post subject:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

Except that was just ONE of the MANY examples found in the 50+ page climate thread

Does your leaked email mean that the sailor of the canoe below is lying?

Is he in on the conspiracy, pretending to see masses of floating garbage?

Stout wrote:

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/hawaiinews/20110721_Plentiful_Pacific_trash_proves_shocking___to_canoe_voyagers.html

The flotilla of double-hulled sailing canoes that left the Hawaiian Islands more than a week ago has encountered masses of rubbish floating in the northeastern Pacific.

btw there is very little meat on the bones of your supposed juicy emails. They really are of no consequence.

Fat_Elvis

Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: In the ghetto

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:06 am Post subject:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

Julius wrote:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

So when you waved away my link which had evidence of temperature data tampering...what you do think you were doing?

I believe that some scientists may have presented some evidence with a certain bias, yes.

However you have taken the exception and claimed it is the rule. You seem to be fond of doing this.

?

The first red flag in the link you posted is in the first sentence, "The Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA), based in Moscow and linked to the U.S. Cato Institute". The Cato Institute are notorious climate change denialists funded by the Koch brothers and petroleum interests. As for the content of the report, without seeing it first hand it's difficult to comment on it, but overall climate scientists have accounted for the urban heat island effect and found it cannot account for increases in global temperature. A good summary of the science can be found at Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island#Global_warming

Also, as stated earlier in this thread, the earlier Climategate thread does not contain large amounts of evidence against surface temperature records, but rather one or two posts that call into question data gathering in specific areas. As I stated earlier

Fat_Elvis wrote:

Overall these criticisms centre on questions regarding the reliability of the surface temperature record, and I will concede that there are difficulties in some regions regarding the taking of measurements in different areas with different methods. Differences in temperatures between points do not, however, deny the fact that the trend is for temperatures to rise. Also it is not just surface temperature records that show rising temperatures; other methods such as satellite measurements of the upper and lower troposphere, borehole analysis, glacial melt observations, rising ocean temperature and more all show a trend of rising temperatures over time.

You still haven't really addressed that.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:07 am Post subject:

Julius wrote:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

Except that was just ONE of the MANY examples found in the 50+ page climate thread

Does your leaked email mean that the sailor of the canoe below is lying?

Is he in on the conspiracy, pretending to see masses of floating garbage?

Stout wrote:

Sensationalist journalism.

Quote:

btw there is very little meat on the bones of your supposed juicy emails. They really are of no consequence.

Yeah, no real consequence, except that they prove beyond a doubt that the supposed data (the majority of which is used even by the IPCC) is a giant, premeditated fraud cooked up by bald-faced liars and charlatans. That many of the most preeminent AGW climatologists were caught lying and were utterly discredited is apparently hardly even newsworthy. 'Tis but a trifle.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:12 am Post subject:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

The Cato Institute are notorious climate change denialists funded by the Koch brothers and petroleum interests.

The Cato Institute has a thousand times more credibility than all your AGW hogwash put together. Any funding it receives is a mere drop in the ocean compared to the immense amount of money that gets poured into the AGW scam by big oil interests.

Fat_Elvis wrote:

Who cares? What does any of the above have to do with proving any of these supposed changes are caused by humans?

Fat_Elvis

Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: In the ghetto

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 2:49 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

The Cato Institute are notorious climate change denialists funded by the Koch brothers and petroleum interests.

The Cato Institute is just a mouthpiece for the corporate interests that fund it, just as the 'libertarianism' it espouses is just a corporate propaganda seeking to reduce taxes and regulation for big business.

Could you please explain why oil interests would be interested in supported the idea that manmade global warming is occurring because of carbon in the atmosphere? Any government action would push the price of oil up, causing people to turn to alternative energy sources and decreasing profits. That's the law of supply and demand, simple economics.

visitorq wrote:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

Who cares? What does any of the above have to do with proving any of these supposed changes are caused by humans?

Well, I already disproved your idea that the sun is causing climate change, so what else could it be?

And do you have evidence of the massive global conspiracy involving thousands of climate change scientists, policy makers and politicians yet?

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2011 12:04 am Post subject:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

Except that libertarianism (which you know nothing about) would also cut off all unfair trade advantages and corporate welfare for big business (thus causing many of the worst ones to go bust instead of getting bailed out by the fascist-socialist government).

Also, saying the Cato Institute is a mouthpiece for the interests that fund it cuts both ways: the AGW global warming movement is also just a mouthpiece, the difference being it's worth hundreds of billions and has full government support (a sure sign it's evil), not just a couple hundred thousand or million here and there.

Quote:

Could you please explain why oil interests would be interested in supported the idea that manmade global warming is occurring because of carbon in the atmosphere? Any government action would push the price of oil up, causing people to turn to alternative energy sources and decreasing profits. That's the law of supply and demand, simple economics.

I've already explained this several times... In the first place, the entire economy depends on oil and this is not going to change. People can't simply change over to alternative energy, because there is nothing that comes close to meeting our energy needs (except possibly nuclear, which is hardy a good substitute when it can cause catastrophic, permanent disasters like in Fukushima). Even if alternative energy does become more viable, the big oil monopolies will want to be in charge of it, and will most likely use state funding and regulation to achieve their aims.

In the meantime, the government causing oil prices to increase (a result of state intervention causing artificial scarcity) will allow the big oil companies to make more profits while producing less. Same old monopoly system as always. Ideal for them, terrible for the public. Also, the major banks that our government owes most of its debt to also own all the major oil companies. These same banks would receive the lion's share of carbon taxes.

Why else do you think an oil baron turned crony politician like Al Gore (who lives in a $9 million ocean front mansion, one of four he has) would be so passionate about carbon taxes? Because it's all about money, and insider connections to benefit from the monopoly.

Quote:

Well, I already disproved your idea that the sun is causing climate change, so what else could it be?

Oh really? Can you disprove that the tides are caused by the moon too? Seriously, you've got nothing. You haven't proven or disproved a single thing anywhere. Obviously the sun causes climate change, since if the sun were magically turned off there would be no climate. The earth would turn into a ball of ice.

Quote:

And do you have evidence of the massive global conspiracy involving thousands of climate change scientists, policy makers and politicians yet?

Yes. The climate gate emails, of which there is an entire mega-thread devoted. Of course you're too lazy to go read it in detail, so I'll just leave you to your ignorance. You want the truth? Go ask Al Gore, he would never lie to you Rolling Eyes

Julius

Joined: 27 Jul 2006

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2011 12:53 am Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

In the meantime, the government causing oil prices to increase (a result of state intervention causing artificial scarcity)

Actually Oil prices have fallen steadily since July 2008.
http://economatters.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/what-matters-weblog-crude-oil-price-chart1.jpg

Also it is not the government that causes oil prices to increase: it is the market responding to real world events...

Quote:

geo-political events and natural disasters indirectly related to the global oil market had strong short-term effects on oil prices, such as North Korean missile tests, the 2006 conflict between Israel and Lebanon,[6] worries over Iranian nuclear plans in 2006,[7] Hurricane Katrina,[8][9] and various other factors.[10] By 2008, such pressures appeared to have an insignificant impact on oil prices given the onset of the global recession.[11] The recession caused demand for energy to shrink in late 2008, with oil prices falling from the July 2008 high of $147 to a December 2008 low of $32.[12] Oil prices stabilized by October 2009 and established a trading range between $60 and $80.[12]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_energy_crisis

VisitorQ wrote:

AGW global warming movement is also just a mouthpiece, the difference being it's worth hundreds of billions and has full government support (a sure sign it's evil),

Hospitals, schools and nursing homes also have full government support to the tune of trillions. Does that prove they are "evil"?

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2011 1:08 am Post subject:

Julius wrote:

visitorq wrote:

In the meantime, the government causing oil prices to increase (a result of state intervention causing artificial scarcity)

Actually Oil prices have fallen steadily since July 2008.
http://economatters.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/what-matters-weblog-crude-oil-price-chart1.jpg

Yes, because the framework is not yet in place and Al Gore has not yet been able to position himself as the Ayatollah of Carbon Taxation (due to many recent setbacks and much opposition both before and especially following the climate gate debacle). Duh.

Quote:

Also it is not the government that causes oil prices to increase: it is the market responding to real world events...

Actually it is both. But "real life events" such as the US invading middle eastern countries (like Iraq and Libya), and putting sanctions on others (Iran) is also caused by the government. Mainly though it is the heavily regulation of the industry, combined with speculation (which is manipulation of the markets carried out by hedge funds and the major banks, Goldman-Sachs / Stanley Morgan and the gang, and not the public at large), that causes artificial scarcity and makes the price shoot up.

Quote:

Hospitals, schools and nursing homes also have full government support to the tune of trillions. Does that prove they are "evil"?

These things could exist without the government (and have done so), that is the difference. And yes, government interference in these things often has evil consequences.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next
Page 9 of 11

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe