Science Global Warming / Climate Change

[Raven]

So you tell a fella over and over and over and over that shitting in his water supply is probably the worst idea he has had ever, you lay out the reasons, you lay out the effects, you lay it out in crayon.

Next day he rolls up his newspaper, tucks it under his arm and proceeds to drop last nights dinner all over tonight's water supply.

Please, share with the group what more we could do? Sure we could force him not to defecate all over his goat'n'rice but for fucks sake, some things really needn't be that hard to understand, should they? Edit, and besides the mad science of bacteria...when did taking a massive shit in your water supply ever become fun?! What possible benefit is there in curling one off in your sink or slow cooker? (to put it in western terms)

Sometimes a lost cause is a lost cause, this bullshit OMG western privilege blah blah blah just doesn't wash when people just refuse to engage their brain.

 

[Moriath]

Darwinism doesn't discount us teaching, helping and educating other humans. We've actually been selected as knowledge-sharers.

Being a callous little fuck who advocates leaving people like that to their fate shows where darwinism has let us down tho.

It's a shame natural selection isn't actually more selective.

We dont have natural selection any more. Its probably why we end up more disease ridden, though we can cure or mitigate some. The weak survive, the premature survive, those with what were limited life spans now breed, making the gene pools worse.

We are on to a king of eugenics again. But natural selection stopped early in the 20th century really.

 

[Bodhi]

Absolutely not. Old Albert did the work, produced a paper, presented and submitted it for peer-review. His work in that field made him part of the conversation.

His eminantely qualified peers then looked at what he'd done - and the world was informed by the experts in terms that the lay man - i.e. everyone else (including scientists that weren't theoretical physicists) could reasonably grasp.

Have you done some related environmental work that enables you to reasonably critique the work of other environmental scientists to a level higher than the troupe of environmental scientists that produce large, regular, developing "state of the science" reports that are there to inform policymakers?

Nope? Didn't think so. So your skepticism falls into the category of uninformed mud slinger. And a hypocritical one at that, because you put your astrophysics degree ahead of my own field-specific degree. And even I'm not dumb enough to think that my more-relevant experience trumps those that are actively working in the field and reviewing the science for us.

Well no, but I did spend 3 years studying the big ball of fire in the sky which drives most of our climate, so I feel I've got a pretty good understanding of the physical and chemical processes involved. And strangely, at no point, if an uneducated layman wanted to challenge one of our professors on any of the theory, they were more than happy to have a discussion and try to change their minds.

At no point, however did they decide to start throwing silly names around, try to suggest they weren't educated enough to be asking such difficult questions, or in any way try to make it about the person asking the questions, before pointing to their credentials and flouncing off in a huff.

Partly because that would only really gain them logical fallacy bingo, but mostly because it would make them look like a colossal bellend.

 

[Scouse]

You're being disingenuous now Bodhi. You know damn well that a physics degree from 20 years ago and a lifetime not spent doing actual science gives you, at best, a basic grasp of what's going on. But it appears that it's also given you an inflated sense of your grasp of the science, because you out of hand discard the expert consensus and side with those dissenters that fit your opinions most closely despite having shaky ground.

Anyway - apart from the fact that you're actually referring to physics students talking to professors (because uneducated lay men aren't actually capable of "challenging" professors on theory - just capable of arguing like children):

At no point, however did they ... try to suggest they weren't educated enough to be asking such difficult questions

Questions aren't bad - but if you're too uneducated to even engage with? Common:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp4dpeJVDxs

 

[old.user4556]

Data.GISS: GISTEMP Update: February 2017 Was Second Warmest February On Record

 

[Raven]

March has been nice and warm too. Off camping soon!

More of this please.

 

[Job]

Data.GISS: GISTEMP Update: February 2017 Was Second Warmest February On Record

Oh...a downward trend then.

 

[Job]

You're being disingenuous now Bodhi. You know damn well that a physics degree from 20 years ago and a lifetime not spent doing actual science gives you, at best, a basic grasp of what's going on. But it appears that it's also given you an inflated sense of your grasp of the science, because you out of hand discard the expert consensus and side with those dissenters that fit your opinions most closely despite having shaky ground.

Anyway - apart from the fact that you're actually referring to physics students talking to professors (because uneducated lay men aren't actually capable of "challenging" professors on theory - just capable of arguing like children):

Questions aren't bad - but if you're too uneducated to even engage with? Common:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp4dpeJVDxs

Richards thought process is a good lead to mine on education, where do you draw the line on assumption, would every lesson have to start with the expansion of the universe, or do you keep moving it just ahead of the curve...

 

[Job]

Nothing unrealistic then.

20 years to save the planet, carbon emission experts warn

 

[Bodhi]

I read that until the "according to a computer model" bit. Garbage goes in....

 

[Scouse]

would every lesson have to start with the expansion of the universe, or do you keep moving it just ahead of the curve...

You are familiar with the concept of learning, right? Physics students learn the basics on the start of their three year undergraduate course. With each lecture and subsequent study they're expected to remember things so they can build up a more complex picture over time and, over the course of their undergraduate careers perhaps achieve a modicum of understanding, full in the knowledge that there's a long way to go.

This is the sort of person that may go on to do a masters, then more years of PhD work, then postdoctoral research. Spending their entire working life learning to understand processes that the rest of us (as Feynmann shows) can have no possible grasp on other than at an utterly infantile level.

You know - the sort of people who do work on climate models that you, a plumber, claim to know better than...

 

[Raven]

That's a lot of faffing about to study the effects of polar bear shit on tropical mosquito populations. Anything for a grant though.

 

[old.user4556]

I mentioned this in another thread, but probably more appropriate here:

Scotland sets two wind power records - Renewable Energy Focus

and then:

Wind turbines in Scotland ‘set new record’ for March

Explain like I'm five - why is wind power so bad?

 

[Bodhi]

Wind itself is fairly unreliable, and has a nasty habit of disappearing when you need it most (cold snaps), they require a shedload of emissions to build in the first place, look ugly and have a habit of lacerating bats/birds of prey.

From an overall ecological point of view I'm struggling to see the advantage over a natural gas/nuclear plant - but then we live in a country that would rather chop down US/Canadian forests, ship it across the Atlantic, instead of just burning the stuff we have in the ground over here. Utterly bananas if you ask me, but thats where we are.

 

[Raven]

Land size of Scotland means you don't have to decimate all your local environment to produce enough power, just some. But, all the rare metals the would be needed to switch to full time renewables come from whigivesafuckistan or the bottom of the sea, so its fine.

 

[Job]

You are familiar with the concept of learning, right? Physics students learn the basics on the start of their three year undergraduate course. With each lecture and subsequent study they're expected to remember things so they can build up a more complex picture over time and, over the course of their undergraduate careers perhaps achieve a modicum of understanding, full in the knowledge that there's a long way to go.

This is the sort of person that may go on to do a masters, then more years of PhD work, then postdoctoral research. Spending their entire working life learning to understand processes that the rest of us (as Feynmann shows) can have no possible grasp on other than at an utterly infantile level.

You know - the sort of people who do work on climate models that you, a plumber, claim to know better than...

I think you are missing the point..the BASICS have to keep moving ahead, the internet, information storage and high speed search / retrieval mean that the basics of today will become pointless to learn very soon, the speed of this increase has just ramped up immensely...AI will simply destroy such notions of bothering to learn anything, we will live on the edge of knowledge..spending years learning stuff will be laughable.

 

[Raven]

Actually. No.

You absolutely have to start at the beginning if you want to learn something new.

 

[Job]

So ..at the big bang as I said?
Do you learn how synapses operate your eye muscles before reading a book...no, you leave all that to..'just is'.
That's what we will do with everything we have now..it 'just is' and that will let us move on, this process has allready well started
in 99% of the workplace and is starting in education finally.

 

[Raven]

No, I mean learning to learn.

 

[Job]

You will..you just start at level 25

 

[dysfunction]

But you need to know how those basics work in order to build on them otherwise you are building on quicksand.

 

[Raven]

No. Because then you end up with people who are incapable of questioning what they are told.

 

[Job]

Still thinking old school here...we have the greatest tool in humanitys history at our fingertips, people find it hard to acknowledge that it will completely change our relationship with personal knowledge..work will dissapear, AI will seek out our knowledge for us...people brainstorming will seem quaint and useless.

 

[Raven]

I am getting a headache now.

I can't be bothered.

 

[Moriath]

I was waiting for the global warming pfft snowing in april in scotland comments hehe

 

[Job]

Were up to 410ppm allready...500 by christmas ftw.