10-24-2017, 02:48 PM
(10-24-2017, 02:11 AM)Galen Wrote:(10-22-2017, 04:51 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: What do we know? There have been numerous environmental predictions that have been made, none of them have come true, and the moral panic that is being whipped up fits nicely into the per-packaged solutions of a certain cabal of individuals. And no I'm not speaking of these scientists--though those polls are probably a scam. A nuclear engineer is a scientist sure, but does he really know shit about the environment beyond what the average everyman does? Probably not. Furthermore science does not concern itself with consensus--that's politics--it concerns itself with facts and simply put we do not have enough facts to say for certain what is going to happen with the climate.
One thing you have to realize is that PBR and most Silent and Boomers grew up in a time where people were taught to trust in authority. In the main they still act that way and with the GIs and Lost running things it wasn't much of a problem but the Boomers have proven themselves to be incompetent. In the interest, probably futile, of imparting useful knowledge to PBR I have included the following video.
The 97% may disagree on probabilities because they do not use the same models and data points. The climate maps have their flaws, as even the climate boundaries are subject to controversy among climatologists, and have been changing. It is possible for climate boundaries defining a classification of a place for as little as one year; in one year of extreme drought, San Francisco (usually Csb, or 'cool-summer Mediterranean) was in the same climate category (BWh) as Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. San Francisco has no real winter, but it has had years in which it got less than a fourth of its usual rainfall. Even for boundaries, the line between climate zones are estimates based upon criteria used. The line between "C" climates and "D" climates can be the 0 C isotherm for the average of the coldest month (that line goes through suburbs of Philadelphia and through New York City) or -3 C isotherm, the limit of lasting snow cover in the winter, which passes north of the suburbs of New York City and through Boston. This quibble allows one to see differing classifications for such cities as Kansas City, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Columbus (Ohio), Pittsburgh, and Providence.
So if their models disagree quantitatively, they might not disagree qualitatively. Although the math is good, assumptions on the output of carbon dioxide will vary.
Nobody should ever look for accuracy in a projection. For example, public accountants cannot endorse any projection of earnings by a business firm.
Quote:
Kinser79Say what you will about Nomads but one thing we do know is a scam when we see one. As Galen pointed out, if one has an IQ above room temperature (in F--doesn't really work in C) and one is also a Nomad you either develop a bullshit detector or end up in the morgue---or worse.
No kidding, the other thing Xers have had to learn the hard way is that sometimes all of the choices are bad. In that case you just pick the one the sucks the least.
Most people have good levels of rationality about some things but not about others. Culture will inform personal choices, and hyper-rational people of very different cultures (Anna Leon-Owens and the King of Siam) can get very different answers to the same question.
And, yes, every generation comes from a different mental environment, often overpowering such distinctions as ethnicity, religion, region, and social class. A young GI male passing through France under command of George S. Patton saw a very different France from what a Boomer seeing France in a 'Junior Year in Paris' or even as an American soldier stationed in Germany during the Vietnam War. From the Missionaries to Millennials, attitudes on race and ethnicity have changed greatly, partly reflecting popular culture and partly reflecting the political reality.
Of course we Boomers do not comprise a political or cultural monolith. I admit that we have some nasty hucksters and shysters, like Rodney Alcala, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Rush Limbaugh, Robert Tilton, Benny Hinn, Michelle Bachmann, Jack Abramoff, Karl Rove, David DuKKKe, Jeffrey Skilling, and Donald Trump. But check your own generation to determine whether yours is any more saintly.
It's up to us all to choose the best and reject the worst. I thought Bill Clinton flawed but brilliant, Dubya hollow, Obama close to the political ideal, and Trump -- well, you know -- before they were elected.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.