Total posts: 4,363
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Nope. I learned a hard lesson about debate set-up assurance in my first debate which I lost, primarily over definitions. That was the debate with you. Nope. No do overs. Had I even thought about that tactic then, I’d have refused to propose it.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
“...are likely accurate...”
Tell me what the statistical confidence of “likely” is. Let alone that measurement accuracy absolutely depends on calibration, and that activity’s own accuracy; a subject which your citation totally ignores.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
If I was was in your particular debate with undefeatable, I would not agree to tie.
Yes, that debate is the root of this string, and, no, I did not accept. I see no justification to do so and in the refusal, I advised that my opponent can concede, forfeit, or continue the debate as is. One's time availability ought to be thought through before the debate is challenged. We're adults here, mostly. I expect time availability is a known quantity, and the challenge is organized appropriately. Do-over is a child's game. Some time ago, when I saw that my time was going to be a brief constraint, I advised the mods that I was leaving for a period, but would return, and wanted my membership to remain intact.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
A bit out of date.
Show the the update that ASIC3 has corrected the issue. That, alone, will tell if the info is out of date.
Never mind: here it is: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1162&context=sdl_pubs. This dates from 2015, and there is no more current data. Yes, there has been further study into the necessity, and current inability, of in-mission. calibration accuracy to replace the executive summary of the 2007 ASIC3 report because the instrumentation dewscribed in this update still refers to calibration technology/equipment developed prior to 2007.
Created:
Posted in:
If I initiate a challenged debate, and have established the protocol, such as number of rounds, time for argument, and for voting, and that challenge is accepted, and only then do I give notice of having no time to devote to the debate, should I expect you would agree to a tied result?
No, there is nothing in the policy regarding this consequence.
How would you react, and why? Honest question.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
The context seems to be...
The context must include lubrication, at least in engines of every sort, even electric, because combustion [not being 100% efficient] in each cylinder burns oil which gaseous remains go out the tailpipe and.. well, you know where it goes. So the context is inclusive, isn't it? See, you don't even realize what your enemy is, and the scope it entails? How2 you ever gonna win, man? While you're reading, read The Art of War.
Personally I don't take much stock into hyperbolic statements said in the moment,
Personally, I prefer to assure just what is hyperbolic, what is hypershyte, and just what gets us into trouble by confusing what we don't know with what we know for sure that just ain't so - a favorite quotation from Mark Twain that AlGore loved to offer, and didn't understand, himself..
Created:
-->
@Reece101
How do you account for satellite data showing Earth’s temperature breaking records each consecutive year?
Same questions of accuracy and calibration apply: to wit, check the following: https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2017/03/15/asic3.pdf. [and note the title of the article, and this quote from the executive summary, which states:
"Instrument calibrations lack traceability to International Standards (SI) units, sensors and onboard calibration sources degrade in orbit, long term data sets must be stitched together from a series of overlapping satellite observations, orbital drift—leading to a changing time of satellite observing time during the satellite’s lifetime—"
Any other wisecracks, bud?
I don't expect you agree, but, I know what I'm talking about, and, as noted, can prove it. Meanwhile, keep listening to your "experts," who've likely never heard of metrology. Hint, it's an older science than climatology. https://msc-conf.com/history-of-metrology/
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Edge, I'm going to relate something that is so personal, I rarely raise it, but this thread is exactly on point. 20 years ago, my father-in-law laid in a hospital bed. I knew he was dying, but had no idea that event was so close at hand. I visited him one evening without my wife with me; I respected him greatly, and I wanted some time alone with him. AS it turned out, he passed away the next morning. That evening, about 7pm, I entered his room, which just had indirect, subdued lighting toward the ceiling and wall behind his bed. He was asleep, with the bed covers up to his chin and his arms outside the covers straight at his sides. He looked so peaceful, I almost walked out again, but something impressed me that I should sit in the chair beside his bed. I did. In a few minutes, suddenly, still asleep, his arms rose straight up, perpendicular to the bed. Then they curled toward one another, forming a circle that had his hands almost reaching the other elbow. He held that pose for a moment, then the arms dropped again. As I was trying to figure out what he was doing, he did it again. And then again. Four or five times more were repeated before I finally figured it out, when suddenly, I began to sense an odor with which I had become familiar when I was dating his daughter, now my wife wife of 47 years. In school, she lived with her grandmother; his mother. She was an avid quilter, who worked daily in the basement of her old house. It had a unique combination of scents, somewhat mouldy, and old fabric. I was there often. Immediately, the two things clicked. In knew she, long since dead, herself, was in the room, and he was hugging family and friends, all unseen, but felt by me. They had come to welcome him home. I felt I had been invited to witness, and realize what was happening, but that now, the room was getting crowded and it was time for me to leave. The feeling I had was glorious, and I began to weep. Complying, I left the room and shut the door, witnessing all that was needed for me to know that death is no barrier and not the end. The spirits of the dead are among us, and aware of us, and can be sensed if they will it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Is there something confusing about perfection and immortality? Don't think as if the brain is limited.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
super christian? His avatar is pounding the Bible, not embracing it. His words pound, they do not embrace. Try reading with a little depth. His syntax seems embracing, but it bites. He is no more Christian than Pontius Pilate, and read that 'u,' which does not exist in Latin, as vitiocus
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Thanks. Haven't looked at Debate.com for a long time. As for the competition you suggest, shredding one another does seem to be a likely outcome, even though I suspect there's more agreement between them than not.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Chinese whispers.
Not familiar with that idiom. From whence is it? I think I get the point, but I'd appreciate being enlightened.
Never mind, I forgot, I have the world at my fingertips. Of course, Google must be verified by a few consistent sources to be certain someone does not have a wild hair up the arse...
Wow, that won't fly in today's racially-sensitive society where just about anything is a racial slur. That's a good idiom, though, understandable in its historic context when few outside of China spoke Chinese. For all it matters to us Yanks, who have, historically, thought that no one needed any other language but English, and we even borrowed that! - anybody's whispers would do!
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
In this opening, I have proven that 4 prophecies of the bible have been fulfilled.
This, from your citation. Although I personally believe Christ has fulfilled these OT prophecies, your "proof" fails because we have not one shred of evidence of original text from David, or any other OT writer, so, who's to say that these prophesies are not written after the advent of Christ, and merely composed to bolster his position and purpose? After all, we don't even have the example of a canonized Bible until a mere 1800 years ago; the Muratorian Canon. And certainly not a canon that the ordinary person could hold in his hands until 600 years ago. The point is, there is a better source of the knowledge of Christ than bashing scriptures back and forth. What do you think that more sure knowledge is?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Once there is no energy left in him
I wonder how you can say with assurance that we will become a black hole park, a counter-argument already with a competing law that matter and energy cannot be destroyed, yet can be interchanged, and then declare that a being will one day have no energy [or, by consequence, no matter, either]. You have just violated one law to propose another exists. Sorry, I don't buy it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nevets
In the end game, however, what does it matter, now, if Methuselah was 900 years old, or 90? As you say, the math can, and does slip. But then, I don't buy the 6-day creation as a finite period of activity [or that God retired and went fishing thereafter], nor the 6,000 year existence of earth since creation. The Bible chronology we "have" that would suggest either as fact is strained considering we don't have an original document of the record, so who knows what purposeful and accidental changes have been made to result in the record we do have? As I've said many times; we should go to the Source [since he isn't fishing]. The only problem is, he may think our need to know is only minimally important to us, now. "No," is a likely response, because the knowledge may not contribute to our purpose. We'd be like a child asking a parent, "Why is water wet?" [We happen to know the answer, and even how many molecules of H2O are required to achieve wetness, because one molecule, alone, is not wet], but, what does that knowledge contribute to the knowledge we must know in order to advance our status in God's eyes? I want to know if a cheetah ever trips, running at full speed, but that's knowledge I don't require. Soon enough, I'll know, and I may not even have to ask God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
not an infinite amount of space in your brain, there is in fact a finite potential for memory,
1. Ever hear of variable brain density, and that variable's effect on brain function, person to person? https://www.uclahealth.org/reversibility-network/workfiles/resources/publications/luders-brain-size.pdf
For example, your memory is estimated to be roughly 2.4 petabytes
Which equates to 1M gb. Whereas, new studies show that human brain memory can store as much as 1 quadrillion bytes [10^15], or, greater than your stated capacity by 10^6.
Then add brain density variability [which means variability in brain function, including memory capacity], which has a rated variance of 40 - 81%, and that is just the mortal human brain. Who knows what increase is possible in the perfect, immortal human brain? Further, Einstein is said to have not known his own phone number, not because he was stupid, but because he realized that some things can be written down so that these items need not be remembered, raising capacity to store more critical information. Moreover, now we don't have to write things down in a notebook, or even on Joe Biden's card he keeps in his pocket at all times. We now have Apple's M1 chip. [By the way, I've seen it, bought it, and will have it on Saturday - it is blazing fast] Who says such a device cannot one day be implanted, or that such a device can still be improved upon?
Created:
-->
@Reece101
do you think Climate change is a communist conspiracy?
Did I say all the predicted disasters were climate-related? No. You merely think I have a one-track mind.
As for the rest, what, you enter one search term and expect that to suffice? No, I will not give you leads. You're not paying me to be your tutor. If you care enough, you will do your own research. Yeah, if you want it bad enough, you will even bleed for it. So bleed. I've done mine.
While you're at at, why don't you see if just temperature measurement devices are all calibrated properly and frequently enough [at least annually], and sensitive enough [the measurement capability must be at least 10x the desired accuracy - in other words, if the incremental measurement needs to be accurate to 1.5 C, then the device needs to demonstrate incremental accuracy of 0.15 C] to assure the measurements are truly reproducible and repeatable accurate data. Hmmmm? IF not, the data will be flawed. I happen to be an expert in this realm, and I don't see this assurance from your experts. I've looked. Have you?
Have you eve read HR109 of the 116th Congress? That piece of shyte that is supposed to be directed at climate change? Ha! Another agenda. And, no, I won't give you the lead on that one either for the same reason as above. You're on your own. Figure out how to do research. You'll think better of yourself n the end.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Who is demanding that *all* petroleum uses be eliminated?
You asked. Regretting that, now? Yes, I agree; the point is moot. Give it up. I have; in fact, I never had it.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
Of experts who say there will be mass migrations and wars over water
You ignore that I am old enough to have listened to "experts" say:
Communism will sweep the nation unless we eradicate commies from our shores. Nope, didn't happen.
Peak oil will occur by the seventies, and we will shortly thereafter run out. Nope, didn't happen.
Our world population will reach a critical threshold, depleting our resources, including food. Nope, did't happen.
The oceans will die by 1980. Nope, didn't happen.
Entire nations will be decimated by 2000 by global warming. Nope, didn't happen.
Lower Manhattan will be underwater by 2018. Didn't happen.
50M climate refugees by 2020. Nope, didn't happen.
Cheery blossoms will bloom in winter in D.C. by 2020. Nope, didn't happen.
There are about 2 dozen other predictions by "experts," based on climate, all to have occurred by now, 2021, that didn't happen.
So, how jaded do you think I am when all these "experts" are 0 - for a lot of failed predictions, yet someone gullible is in every crowd. They're all based on science? Funny thing, science is supposed to depend on empiric evidence, not some cloud-cleaner's crystal ball.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
So, even if we excuse the plastics issue, all of it still employs lubrication of machinery parts, whether engines, or not, and the only lubrication agent available for industry or residentially is fossil fuel-based, and will continue to be sourced as such until you have AlGore Gooey Juice. But I have cited just Biden [you want more?] that fossil fuels are to be eliminated, not just reduced. Yes, the idiot said, and repeated it, so one should admit that he has not denied it [although he's done that, too.] So, in the end, you have a proponent that does not have his own mind. I think that's a more serious problem we face than the potential that we are on a path of near-future extinction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
First law of thermodynamics:
Energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system
Second law of t-d:
The entropy of an isolated system always increases
Third law of t-d:
The entropy of an isolated system approaches a constant value as the temperature approaches absolute zero.
Entropy: the degree of uncertainty, disorder or randomness of an isolated system.
Tell me, then, what choice has to do with any of this. As I become colder, I will tend to make fewer choices until reaching a random point of no choice at all? I’m guessing, but I’ll wager that at absolute zero, I’ll have greater concerns than losing the ability to choose.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system
Second law of t-d:
The entropy of an isolated system always increases
Third law of t-d:
The entropy of an isolated system approaches a constant value as the temperature approaches absolute zero.
Entropy: the degree of uncertainty, disorder or randomness of an isolated system.
Tell me, then, what choice has to do with any of this. As I become colder, I will tend to make fewer choices until reaching a random point of no choice at all? I’m guessing, but I’ll wager that at absolute zero, I’ll have greater concerns than losing the ability to choose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
phasing out
Sorry, but words mean things, and you cannot gerrymander words to mean whatever the hell you want then to say.
According to the OED: Phase-out, n, "A gradual removal; a phased elimination."
Joe Biden: "We are going to get rid of fossil fuels." [2/28/2020] https://www.atr.org/joe-biden-we-are-going-get-rid-fossil-fuels
Joe Biden: [10/23/2020] “I would transition away from the oil industry, yes,” Biden said in the presidential debate’s closing minutes under peppering from Trump. “The oil industry pollutes, significantly. ... It has to be replaced by renewable energy over time.” [Actually, petroleum is a renewable energy source because the Earth keeps making the stuff and it will continue to make until life on Earth ends. But, your ilk does not want to acknowledge that, so strike it if that is your preferred word-gerrymander.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
...hard upper limit
According to whom? A pocket mouse?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
You are talking about the Apple gay dating App, HOLE, right?
No. Not even aware of it. I'm changing to pie hole to an apple hole. Come on, you know that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
All that is understood. I know net zero is a ratio. So, why the demand that all petroleum uses be eliminated? Because, like the rest of the GND, net-zero is, as well, an agenda, and not hard science.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
there’s too much being produced.
Of CO2, I presume you mean.
You maintain there is too much, based on what measure? Yes, I acknowledge that we see historic levels of CO2 in the environment, whether on the ground, in the water, or in the atmosphere. But, what says that "too much" is, indeed, excessive? Simply because it's historic? I have a glass. I fill it to half it's containable volume. Then, I declare, because it has been at a half-glass level for a long time [and we suspend evaporation for purposes of argument], that the half-glass condition is "normal." Then , for reasons that can be discussed [but are not yet hard science], I add half again in volume; an additional 1/4 of the glass's total containable volume, but I declare, again for reasons that can be discussed [but are not yet hard science], that if another ml. of water is added, we will overflow the glass. Again, I ask, based upon what measure is my latter statement justified? As I look at the volume potential of the glass, and the measured amount of water in it, I can see clearly that we are not yet at any threshold that would overflow the glass. Our problem with climate change alarm is that we have no idea what the potential volume of the Earth is that exhibits a hardline threshold, over which the containment of CO2 is truly excessive. We're guessing, strictly based upon the fact that the measurable past of CO2 containment has never been as high as now. What levels have we seen in pre-history? We don't know.
Not to mention that you keep mentioning CO2 in ignorance of the mention of CH4. Is that by agenda, that CO2 can be targeted as having its worst affect by anthropogenic cause, but that natural wetlands produce more CH4 into the water, land and atmosphere, and is worse than CO2 by effect by a factor of 24x, than CO2, and that anthropogenic cause of CH4 is less than half [more like 1/3] of total CH4 levels in the environment, and that natural, and cultivated [like rice] wetlands contribute close to 65%, but nobody who is a GND proponent will admit that? That's wehat I mean by an agenda.
Okay, you argue, we are in our sixth period of mass extinction. So? Tell me how many of those other five periods included anthropogenic cause of alarm? And I challenge a denial that adaptation occurs in response to climatic events. Show me that biodiversity is merely theory; that we do not, in fact, observe its occurrence.
It’s a joke. It was in response to your sock puppet comment.
The forgoing is your sock puppet telling you were are at a crisis level of CO2 containment. That is no joke.
Created:
Some think the answer to everything is a 44. I don't, but, there it is.
Created:
Posted in:
"Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose" is a apt refrain for anyone failing at capitalism, written by Kris Kristofferson and made famous by Janis Joplin - the last recording she evert made just days before she checked-out. She knew, as did Kristofferson, that it was a lie.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Work has nothing to so with UBI.
That's the most rational thing you've ever said. You're right, UBI has nothing whatsoever to do with work. In fact, it replaces it and its value entirely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
Guess who truly produces the wealth owned by the public sector. It ain't the public sector; they don't produce anything, other than by printing it. But, it's the private sector that gives it value, and it's the public sector that taxes it more than it should, thus reducing its worth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nevets
On the other hand, early in human history, perhaps we did not have all the social, political, economic, religious, medical, and just plain stupidity issues that we humans now burden ourselves with to shorten our lifespan. We don't even need to leave the man-cave anymore and we encounter life-shortening toxins. I'm suspicious that their DNA, then, was more robust than it is, now. Medical science has observed that there is no real identifiable reason why, at cellular level, cells die, given a proper diet from which to draw the proper nutrients to sustain life. No reason other than one: After all, we are what we put in the pie hole. Problem is, perhaps it was never meant to eat pie rather than just eat the apple to satisfy the sweet tooth. Not to mention historically absent food sources: Fast food. Processed food. Chemically preserved food. What ever happened to fresh food? By the way, that's virtually all located at the outer perimeter of virtually every supermarket, the stuff that was all there was in old grocery stores that were smaller than today's barber shop. I remember them.
Perhaps, at >70 years of age, my doctor declares I have the heart, lungs, kidneys, eyes, etc, of a 20-year-old, and they all operate at a higher efficiency than he usually sees. I am an ideal organ donor. Because I'm careful what goes into my apple hole.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
"the one thing that could stop it: force, rooted in justice, and backed by moral courage."
Seems peacemaking, then applying the other honorable mentions of the Sermon on the Mount would accomplish more, better, and enduring. In fact, that brief philosophy would make a terrific political platform.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
@Theweakeredge
Philosophy is science is chemistry is an omelette..
Well, since philosophy questions everything, and Tommy Jefferson said, the other day, that we should question everything with boldness, I suppose philosophy ought to always be referenced as PHILOSOPHY?
does that help?
Created:
It’s a wide held theory in the astronomy community
A theory, my friend, that NASA will not confirm. That CO2 [although, it appears, by the science, that CH4 is a more efficient GHG-producing effect] is a GHG agent is certainly a plausible cause of Venus' current status, notwithstanding, it does not discount the possibility, n o, the probability of species adaptation.
Imagine the drain as storing CO2 and the sink as absorbing CO2.
You're in a circular argument. Storage is absorption. And there's a tax somehow involved? Yeah, there is; it's called charging carbon credits. That's an excise. Sure that's what you meant?
Please keep your anti-Semitic dog whistles in check.
What anti-Semetic dog whistle? Reaching for a slur that isn't there. I mentioned nothing about Semites, or dogs, or their whistles. You're ging to have to explain that comment.
Curious that we count death with greater apparent accuracy than life. Your cited article regarding mass extinction says nothing of biodiversity; the article I cited, as if biodiversity is a myth to be ignored. Your extinction article does not give biodiversity, or speciation, a mention. Gee, why not? I see agenda warnings all over. I will acknowledge that the website you cite does have a biodiversity section in the menu, but, what is the current top story? Food systems [showing cows as a graphic] causing 30% of GHG emission. Take a guess what takes most of that pie: wetlands. And a big contributor: rice production: all told, over 50% of GHG's, in particular, CH4. So, eat your rice, but leave my steak alone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
It was not my purpose to enter a side-debate; otherwise, I would have challenged a debate. Debate and forum serve entirely different purposes in my book. I am not arguing against biblical contradictions; I acknowledge they exist, and, in the debate to which I refer, they are presented as a perfectly salient argument. but having such a specific list triggered the thought that many of the same types who not only acknowledge, but argue the legitimacy of such a list seem to ignore that there is a common type of listing that exists with climate change. That dichotomy is my interest, whareas that debate has naught to do with climate change.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Oh, no. I misspoke. I said
we have the means to resolve it with taking advantage of others to improve ourselves.
I meant to say "we have the means to resolve [suffering] without taking advantage of others to improve ourselves."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
I agree somewhat with where you're going, but I disagree that we must wait to be immortal to solve suffering. Contrary to secularmerlin's thinking, I believe we, collectively, though not individually, are responsible for the suffering we endure; it is not God's doing. Even on an individual basis, I believe we are each chiefly responsible for our suffering, and we have the means to resolve it with taking advantage of others to improve ourselves. ONe of the majors in suffering is what we choose to put in our pie hole. The connection of our consumption and resulting effects is huge.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Nepotism; the sign of a weak boss. You're better off cutting the business-world umbilical. Good for you. I did it about the same timing as you, and never looked back. It hasn't been easy, but definitely worth every bump in the road. Believe in yourself and your capabilities. Best of luck to you, though luck should have little to do with it. What kind of business, if I may be so bold?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WisdomofAges
Sounds more like the schizophrenic stereotypical confused soul who knows neither A or T beyond what is read in Pogo. Angry, to be sure. About what is less conclusive. Perhaps angered by a mirror; the nemesis of all, the 99.9% included.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
the filament (the part of the bulb that produces light when heated by an electrical current) and the bulb’s atmosphere (whether air is vacuumed out of the bulb or it is filled with an inert gas to prevent the filament from oxidizing and burning out). These early bulbs had extremely short lifespans, were too expensive to produce or used too much energy.
Yes, I'll admit that the idea was older than Edison, but it was his contribution, both in the filament material and in the inner-bulb environment, that produced the first enduring incandescent light bulb that had commercial value.
Did I not say in my #28 "...so, they, too, are on that path of wish > hope > plan > execute > fail > revise plan > succeed > revise plan > improve > revise plan > achieve a perfect light?"
your memory is estimated to be roughly 2.4 petabytes.
Yes, but is that the max potential volume, or merely current state? I suspect the latter, since I am still learning and creating memory.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't find beating on each other to be entertaining in the slightest. I think, were I born during the Roman Empire, and I were a Roman citizen seeking entertainment, my preference would have been to invent baseball. Maybe gladiators could be umpires, for all the grunting current umpires emote. When I was a kid, I could still understand them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Who is Backwarsden.
Anyone who wants to argue with a certain sand-pounder has got to be a little crazy, however, so... why not.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
They all dried up.
Did they? What credentials affirm that consequence, let alone the original condition? Meanwhile, according to NASA, Venus may have had water. No certainty. Even if it did, was there a humanoid population causing climate change? On that, NASA says naught. So, your conjecture is not accepted.
We produce more CO2 than oceans and other bodies of water can absorb.
If the waters of Earth are filled with CO2 to capacity, why do we still call them "sinks?"
By the way, CO2 makes oceans acidic.
I already admitted that in my #21:
Yes, as with any change effect of the environment, amassing CO2 in the oceans [and other water] has an effect on the eco-system
So, why belabor the point? No points awarded for belaboring in the Forum.
That link doesn’t discuss anthropomorphic climate change. It refers to the past couple million years.
That link's article subject is not about climate change of any source; anthropo- or by gazelles. You're expecting apples from an orange tree? Go fish.
The fact is more species are going extinct today due to ACC.
Fact according to whom? Your sock puppet? Sorry, credibility. At least I cited an article supporting the idea of in creased speciation, in spite of extinction. Your source? And if you have one, define why your source is any more correct than mine. That's part of research responsibility.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
I also have a few of my own, regardless of Edwin Berry.
"Climate Change" [by the quoted, I imply that it is a political agenda and not strictly an honest environment-saving effort. In fact, some of these contradicitns havce naught to do with the environment, but appear to be exclusively political motives. For brevity, C.C. is "Climate Change"]
1. In the original Green Party US proposal for the Green New Deal, and what became HR109 in the 116th Congress, there were 5 proposals for initiation of the GND. No 3 was "Create a Commission for Economic Democracy to provide publicity, training, education, and direct financing for cooperative development and for democratic reforms to make government agencies, private associations, and business enterprises more participatory. We will strengthen democracy via participatory budgeting and institutions that encourage local initiative and democratic decision-making." Such a commission has nothing whatsoever to do with environmental protection or cleansing. Rather, it is an effort by government to control private industry budgeting. Socialism cocktail, anyone? Sorry, we ran out of liquor 6 months ago. [It used to be produced by natgas-heated vats, but... well, you know...]
2. The newly announced [for President Biden, but certainly not a new idea] to eliminate petroleum-based engines of all types in favor of electric-powered engines ignores that the electric engines still contain component parts made of plastic - a petroleum-based material. Worse, all electric engines have moving parts, all of which require lubrication, all of which is derived from petroleum. It seems AlGore has fallen down on producing AlGore Gooey Juice as a lubricant replacement, and, until that threshold is crossed by green technology, the aim to achieve net-zero is defeated.
2b. Let's not ignore that currently, electric power is currently sourced by a variety of fossil fuels. Fully 60% of electric power is sourced by fossil fuels. Is that source to be completely replaced by "green energy" within the deadline set by the Paris Accord, including the need to replace the necessities in item 2; plastic components and a green lubrication fluid? By the way, also currently, strict green energy provides 6% of all power to the energy grid. Some net-zero.
2c. Which current electric-powered engine supplies the necessary torque to power engines operating large equipment, including train engines and aircraft engines, with the same efficiency of petroleum-powered engines? Currently, which electric-powere engine company produces an engine capable of that torque?
3. The most effective and proven efficient renewable-energy-source device in current production with very capable replacement of residential, and some commercial enterprise power source - solar panels, currently contain many plastic components, sharing that issue with engines. The need for AlGore Gooey Juice increases exponentially. Where is it?
4 The batteries that are to solve the current kick-back of energy to the power grid rather than retaining power at the power-use site [residential and commercial] for energy storage for use during half of a 24-hour period during which there is no "solar" are: a] inefficient, b] excessively expensive with a poor storage/efficiency curve, [ d] contain petroleum-based plastic components [AlGoreGooey Juice, where the hell are you?!]. The same issue applies to electric-powered vehicle and equipment engines.
5. All current energy-producing turbines, even those claimed to be green energy-sourced, use... guess what? fossil fuel-sourced lubricants and plastic components, so how green-sourced are they, really? We're talking hydro-, geothermal, wind, and, to some degree, industrial-use solar energies. Dammit, where is AlGore Gooey Juice????
6. Shall we talk about the use of petroleum-based-plastics in virtually every human endeavor from agriculture to zoology? Net-zero? Don't make me https://www.google.com/search?rls=en&sxsrf=ALeKk00tgmu4_03yHbKWD5BCJf7vYgiB8Q:1619319907703&source=univ&tbm=isch&q=image+cartoon+of+laughing+man&client=safari&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjZ_IDftJjwAhUDNH0KHQzJB8AQjJkEegQIBRAB&biw=1665&bih=897
Have an AlGore Gooey Juice cocktail, on the house? Sorry, fresh out.
These issues are swept under the rug to avoid discussion of the contradictions they present to the GND, and its salivating proponents seeking the end of petroleum use.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
And you cannot INTENTIONALLY (willfully) "choose" something you have no concept of.
By that logic, were I Thomas Edison, I therefore cannot conceive of a light bulb, let alone invent it. No, he chose, specifically, to create artificial light, and succeeded. Others have improved on the idea made reality, so, they, too, are on that path of wish > hope > plan > execute > fail > revise plan > succeed > revise plan > improve > revise plan > achieve a perfect light.
I am free [I do not have restrictions to achieve] and I will to make my plans happen as planned. Thus, free will allows my ambition, planning and execution; a lesson my father taught me while I was a child.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Bearing children in heaven seems pointless.
Perpetuation. I believe that as man is, God once was, and that as God is, man may become, and that this sets up just two generations that are exemplary of infinite generations wherein gods beget men, men become gods, and so on. eternally.
So, your (eternal) mind is not yet "eternal", but at some point in the future will be "frozen"?Does this mean you will no longer be able to learn anything?
No, my mind is in progress within an eternal existence, a progression that is, itself, eternal. Eternal, being of its own nature, would indicate that knowledge, and the ability to acquire it, is also eternal.
Yeah, also, not every human is "destined" to become a breeder.And yet, strangely, they're still considered human.
My statement above [the first] might indicate that all men will become gods. No, only those who are completely obedient to God's will, because he has been through this progression through mortality, and beyond, himself, and therefore knows the appropriate path to take, and expects [but knows expectations will not all be met] that we follow it obediently. Not all will. Those who do, become gods. Those who cannot, by some flaw in the mortal construct of reproduction, and will not have children in mortality, if they prove obedient to God, becoming gods themselves, will have perfect bodies in the resurrection, and will be given to right to bear children in the eternities. Those who do not become gods will not have that privilege. Bearing children in the eternities is a privilege restricted to godhood.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Strictly as a comparison of solipsism to the idea that God is everything, I suppose there is that suggestion, but I maintain that God being everything is nothing but a suggestion. I am not God, and have no illusion that I am. Solipsism, being all about illusion but for the self, would confirm that no one, and no thing but God can confirm his existence beyond illusion, according to solipsism. Solipsism, is, then, self-defeating.
Created:
Posted in:
The radical politics of climate change have much the same tactic as the radical politics of biblical denial by inverse relationship. As the strength of bible denial by the argument of contradiction rises, the inverse is true of climate change proponents: a growing ignorance of its contradictions. To advance the contradiction, these are not tactics by opposing traditional politics within its own narrow realm; it is practiced by compatriots on the same side of the political progressive/conservative dichotomies: Progrssives.
We have been regaled by biblical contradiction. A list is adequately provided by Undefeatable’s current debate with logicae: https://www.debateart.com/debates/3007-utilitarianism-is-a-preferable-moral-foundation-compared-to-the-bible
in which Undefeatable presents this source: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2018/10/top-20-most-damning-bible-contradictions/
Let me introduce that to which Climate Change, in the guise of the IPPC, is apparently ignorant:
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=contradictions+of+climate+change&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
To read, it must be downloaded, [about 16 pages] but there is no restriction to do so.
We have been regaled by biblical contradiction. A list is adequately provided by Undefeatable’s current debate with logicae: https://www.debateart.com/debates/3007-utilitarianism-is-a-preferable-moral-foundation-compared-to-the-bible
in which Undefeatable presents this source: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2018/10/top-20-most-damning-bible-contradictions/
Let me introduce that to which Climate Change, in the guise of the IPPC, is apparently ignorant:
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=contradictions+of+climate+change&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
To read, it must be downloaded, [about 16 pages] but there is no restriction to do so.
I invite its review; and an explanation by climate change proponents. After all, I am repeatedly asked to explain biblical contradiction. The difference is, I do explain. This is often refuted; curiously, by general vilification rather than true debate. I've been called every slur from A to Z. Time for some reciprocation, yeah?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
They definitely pretend to be the more consequentialist side but in reality they have rigid, idealistic principles that have horrific ripple effects.
You mean like Marx, who never ran a lemonade stand to develop his economic theory that has never shown a true, successful, enduring consequence of its application that has lasted even half as long as free market capitalism in 173 years of effort?
Created: