This topic has been locked by a moderator.
If CNN believes that climate change is coming, we’re all doomed, and that New York is going to be underwater as soon as 2015 2018 2045, then why are they moving all of their operations to New York?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/cnn-moves-to-centralize-in-new-york-189029
So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?
Doesn’t matter since you weren’t alive. Everyone knows that something isn’t valid unless you personally experienced it.
Not true. And answer the question please.
ferris, I thought I read somewhere that your personal experience means squat? What gives? Are you experiencing hot and cold flashes all of a sudden?
😉
I think personal experience only matters if it conforms to a certain ideology.
Gotchya. I hope your temperature malady clears up soon. I’d hate to think we could only save you by putting you on the news with a well phrased ad and celebrity attached to it.
😉
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit. Furthermore, I absolutely doubt that we can either change or affect it whatsoever. Besides, a warmer earth even by a degree is better for us, it allows more crops to flourish among many other things.
Plus, shall I again remind you “recorded history” is only the last 140 years? Unless you believe a young earth, then that’s pretty bad science to base an entire theory about the planet based only on .0000000001% of the earths history.
Meteorological charts go back to 1850 (thermometers etc) - so you’re getting on for 170 years. Still a small portion of the Earth’s history - but a reasonable point to measure when factoring in comparisons for the age of the Second Industrial Revolution (factories, urbanisation, smoke, grit, dust, grime, gas and chemicals, coal and mining taking place on a more ‘industrial’ scale leading to engines - powering and use of).
.
To the later question of ‘So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?’ - that’s a wider-ranging question, when and where? At which point in the Middle Ages? Circa 1000 when some believe there to have been the Little Ice Age? Or the Warming Period in SouthEast Asia & parts of Northern Europe around the same time?
Am off too bed now (late in the UK) - but am curious as to your answer and why (as well as where and when).
A little patience goes a long way on this old-school Rebel base. If you are having issues finding what you are looking for, these will be of some help…
Welcome to the OriginalTrilogy.com | Introduce yourself in here | Useful info within : About : Help : Site Rules : Fan Project Rules : Announcements
‘How do I do this?’ on the OriginalTrilogy.com; some info & answers + FAQs - includes info on how to search for projects and threads on the OT•com
A Project Index for Star Wars Preservations (Harmy’s Despecialized & 4K77/80/83 etc) : A Project Index for Star Wars Fan Edits (adywan & Hal 9000 etc)
… and take your time to look around this site before posting - to get a feel for this place. Don’t just lazily make yet another thread asking for projects.
If CNN believes that climate change is coming, we’re all doomed, and that New York is going to be underwater as soon as
201520182045, then why are they moving all of their operations to New York?http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/cnn-moves-to-centralize-in-new-york-189029
These kinds of posts are the reason I’m not interested in answering your question.
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit. Furthermore, I absolutely doubt that we can either change or affect it whatsoever. Besides, a warmer earth even by a degree is better for us, it allows more crops to flourish among many other things.
Plus, shall I again remind you “recorded history” is only the last 140 years? Unless you believe a young earth, then that’s pretty bad science to base an entire theory about the planet based only on .0000000001% of the earths history.
Meteorological charts go back to 1850 (thermometers etc) - so you’re getting on for 170 years. Still a small portion of the Earth’s history - but a reasonable point to measure when factoring in comparisons for the age of the Second Industrial Revolution (factories, urbanisation, smoke, grit, dust, grime, gas and chemicals, coal and mining taking place on a more ‘industrial’ scale leading to engines - powering and use of).
.
To the later question of ‘So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?’ - that’s a wider-ranging question, when and where? At which point in the Middle Ages? Circa 1000 when some believe there to have been the Little Ice Age? Or the Warming Period in SouthEast Asia & parts of Northern Europe around the same time?
Am off too bed now (late in the UK) - but am curious as to your answer and why (as well as where and when).
You decide.
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit. Furthermore, I absolutely doubt that we can either change or affect it whatsoever. Besides, a warmer earth even by a degree is better for us, it allows more crops to flourish among many other things.
Plus, shall I again remind you “recorded history” is only the last 140 years? Unless you believe a young earth, then that’s pretty bad science to base an entire theory about the planet based only on .0000000001% of the earths history.
Meteorological charts go back to 1850 (thermometers etc) - so you’re getting on for 170 years. Still a small portion of the Earth’s history - but a reasonable point to measure when factoring in comparisons for the age of the Second Industrial Revolution (factories, urbanisation, smoke, grit, dust, grime, gas and chemicals, coal and mining taking place on a more ‘industrial’ scale leading to engines - powering and use of).
.
To the later question of ‘So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?’ - that’s a wider-ranging question, when and where? At which point in the Middle Ages? Circa 1000 when some believe there to have been the Little Ice Age? Or the Warming Period in SouthEast Asia & parts of Northern Europe around the same time?
Am off too bed now (late in the UK) - but am curious as to your answer and why (as well as where and when).
You decide.
Damn you ferris, for wanting real dialog and real discussion, I pale in comparison to you.
NYT is unreliable.
This is why the right always wins.
Eh, it’s not winning, it’s all just taking one news institution’s word over another for no other reason than they cater to your personal political views. Both sides are guilty and buy right into the line that they’re being sold.
As a result, media becomes more and more politically polarized because real objective news journalism doesn’t sell like sensationalized attack “news,” and as a result of that, our political parties become more and more polarized, no compromises are reached (why would you compromise with someone who is obviously wrong and an idiot, after all), and America suffers.
Nobody “wins” in this equation, except for the people making money off of the people who blindly follow the narrative they offer on their “news outlet.” Until news stops being a business focused around driving clicks so they can sell ad space, this decline will continue. Unfortunately, that’s up to the people to not blindly buy what they’re being sold, and since people don’t like to think for themselves, who knows when things will change.
I understand your argument, but I believe the right is going to come out as the victor in this polarized environment. They control all three branches of the federal government now, so they are in control of how our lives will be run in the next four years.
Even though Trump is coming into office with little popularity, the left-leaning media has even less popularity than he does. Click on any youtube video critical about institutional racism or sexism, and it will have a ton of dislikes automatically. I remember an online ad featuring a transgender kid and it has 25,000 dislikes vs. about 300 likes. The most hated channels on that site are MTV news and Feminist Frequency, while the most popular channels are the likes of Sargon Of Akkad and TheAmazingAtheist, which spend most of their time “debunking” leftist opinions. Anyone who doesn’t harbor a far-right viewpoint online is labeled a Marxist who wants to send everyone into reeducation camps. It’s far more socially acceptable to be on the right on social media rather than on the left.
All of the people you listed are on the left. The reason Feminist Frequency and MTV News are hated is because they are full of shit. TAA is an all-out socialist leftist. He just doesn’t like identity politics. Idk about Sargon but he’s not right of center.
Why is identity politics bad then?
Because not all people of a race or gender are the same? It doesn’t even pertain to this conversation. The point was that you were accusing leftists of being far-right purely because they’re opposed to identity politics. The reason MTV and Feminist Frequency are extreme is because they blame men and white people for everything, and they also overreact to non-issues, like video games.
The Person in Question
I’ve never heard of Feminist Frequency and MTV is just that shitty channel that doesn’t play music anymore.
I suppose he’s hearkening to the “Earth has gone through several heating and cooling periods through the eons, so what we’re experiencing now is nothing new or unnatural” argument against AGW.
Well ok but if it’s unrecorded history he has no way of knowing that.
Exactly, and there’s way more of it than recorded history.
Ok, so it doesn’t worry you in the slightest that this was the hottest year in recorded history, or that the 16 warmest years since 1880 have all occurred in the 2000s except one (which was 1998), because there might have been one year before recorded history that was hotter. Maybe.
Ok.
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit. Furthermore, I absolutely doubt that we can either change or affect it whatsoever. Besides, a warmer earth even by a degree is better for us, it allows more crops to flourish among many other things.
I am pretty sure it would a bad thing for those effected increase in hurricanes and what not, also there are those that might find their properties under the ocean. I would think that to be a bad thing.
Plus, shall I again remind you “recorded history” is only the last 140 years? Unless you believe a young earth, then that’s pretty bad science to base an entire theory about the planet based only on .0000000001% of the earths history.
I think it based on more than that. I think scientists do have ways of examining the weather patterns before the recorded history. I think one is examining ice formations that are deep deep within the ice at the poles.
I do have to say if the fact that the 16 warmest years since 1880 have all occurred in the 2000s except one, doesn’t cause you the slightest bit of concern, you are not looking at this logically, rationally or in a non-biased manner.
NYT is unreliable.
This is why the right always wins.
Eh, it’s not winning, it’s all just taking one news institution’s word over another for no other reason than they cater to your personal political views. Both sides are guilty and buy right into the line that they’re being sold.
As a result, media becomes more and more politically polarized because real objective news journalism doesn’t sell like sensationalized attack “news,” and as a result of that, our political parties become more and more polarized, no compromises are reached (why would you compromise with someone who is obviously wrong and an idiot, after all), and America suffers.
Nobody “wins” in this equation, except for the people making money off of the people who blindly follow the narrative they offer on their “news outlet.” Until news stops being a business focused around driving clicks so they can sell ad space, this decline will continue. Unfortunately, that’s up to the people to not blindly buy what they’re being sold, and since people don’t like to think for themselves, who knows when things will change.
I understand your argument, but I believe the right is going to come out as the victor in this polarized environment. They control all three branches of the federal government now, so they are in control of how our lives will be run in the next four years.
Even though Trump is coming into office with little popularity, the left-leaning media has even less popularity than he does. Click on any youtube video critical about institutional racism or sexism, and it will have a ton of dislikes automatically. I remember an online ad featuring a transgender kid and it has 25,000 dislikes vs. about 300 likes. The most hated channels on that site are MTV news and Feminist Frequency, while the most popular channels are the likes of Sargon Of Akkad and TheAmazingAtheist, which spend most of their time “debunking” leftist opinions. Anyone who doesn’t harbor a far-right viewpoint online is labeled a Marxist who wants to send everyone into reeducation camps. It’s far more socially acceptable to be on the right on social media rather than on the left.
All of the people you listed are on the left. The reason Feminist Frequency and MTV News are hated is because they are full of shit. TAA is an all-out socialist leftist. He just doesn’t like identity politics. Idk about Sargon but he’s not right of center.
Why is identity politics bad then?
Because not all people of a race or gender are the same? It doesn’t even pertain to this conversation. The point was that you were accusing leftists of being far-right purely because they’re opposed to identity politics. The reason MTV and Feminist Frequency are extreme is because they blame men and white people for everything, and they also overreact to non-issues, like video games.
What are non-issues to you are aggressions to the marginalized. It’s like Chinese water torture: a single drop of water seems harmless to you, but imagine thousands of them after a long period of time and let’s see how you feel. Besides, men and/or white people have been doing shitty things to people for hundreds of years, and people pretend that it’s not going on right now. Instead they constantly blame victims (“black people CAN BE racist”) so we end up losing focus on the real issue yelling at each other about semantics.
Fuck it, you’ll just dismiss my arguments anyways.
So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?
perhaps we could figure that out by looking at what people back then wrote about that weather. They may not have recorded exact temperatures, but they surely talked about the weather. Surely some understanding about the weather back then could be gained.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm
So you do think it was warmer?
I am pretty sure Frink is indicating that it was colder back then.
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit. Furthermore, I absolutely doubt that we can either change or affect it whatsoever. Besides, a warmer earth even by a degree is better for us, it allows more crops to flourish among many other things.
Plus, shall I again remind you “recorded history” is only the last 140 years? Unless you believe a young earth, then that’s pretty bad science to base an entire theory about the planet based only on .0000000001% of the earths history.
Meteorological charts go back to 1850 (thermometers etc) - so you’re getting on for 170 years. Still a small portion of the Earth’s history - but a reasonable point to measure when factoring in comparisons for the age of the Second Industrial Revolution (factories, urbanisation, smoke, grit, dust, grime, gas and chemicals, coal and mining taking place on a more ‘industrial’ scale leading to engines - powering and use of).
.
To the later question of ‘So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?’ - that’s a wider-ranging question, when and where? At which point in the Middle Ages? Circa 1000 when some believe there to have been the Little Ice Age? Or the Warming Period in SouthEast Asia & parts of Northern Europe around the same time?
Am off too bed now (late in the UK) - but am curious as to your answer and why (as well as where and when).
You decide.
Damn you ferris, for wanting real dialog and real discussion, I pale in comparison to you.
Is that what he wants?
My god, climate change deniers are amazing.
I don’t deny that climate changes, just this morning it was cold outside now it’s not.
If CNN believes that climate change is coming, we’re all doomed, and that New York is going to be underwater as soon as
201520182045, then why are they moving all of their operations to New York?http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/cnn-moves-to-centralize-in-new-york-189029
I suppose he’s hearkening to the “Earth has gone through several heating and cooling periods through the eons, so what we’re experiencing now is nothing new or unnatural” argument against AGW.
Well ok but if it’s unrecorded history he has no way of knowing that.
Exactly, and there’s way more of it than recorded history.
Ok, so it doesn’t worry you in the slightest that this was the hottest year in recorded history, or that the 16 warmest years since 1880 have all occurred in the 2000s except one (which was 1998), because there might have been one year before recorded history that was hotter. Maybe.
Ok.
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit.
NYT is unreliable.
This is why the right always wins.
Eh, it’s not winning, it’s all just taking one news institution’s word over another for no other reason than they cater to your personal political views. Both sides are guilty and buy right into the line that they’re being sold.
As a result, media becomes more and more politically polarized because real objective news journalism doesn’t sell like sensationalized attack “news,” and as a result of that, our political parties become more and more polarized, no compromises are reached (why would you compromise with someone who is obviously wrong and an idiot, after all), and America suffers.
Nobody “wins” in this equation, except for the people making money off of the people who blindly follow the narrative they offer on their “news outlet.” Until news stops being a business focused around driving clicks so they can sell ad space, this decline will continue. Unfortunately, that’s up to the people to not blindly buy what they’re being sold, and since people don’t like to think for themselves, who knows when things will change.
I understand your argument, but I believe the right is going to come out as the victor in this polarized environment. They control all three branches of the federal government now, so they are in control of how our lives will be run in the next four years.
Even though Trump is coming into office with little popularity, the left-leaning media has even less popularity than he does. Click on any youtube video critical about institutional racism or sexism, and it will have a ton of dislikes automatically. I remember an online ad featuring a transgender kid and it has 25,000 dislikes vs. about 300 likes. The most hated channels on that site are MTV news and Feminist Frequency, while the most popular channels are the likes of Sargon Of Akkad and TheAmazingAtheist, which spend most of their time “debunking” leftist opinions. Anyone who doesn’t harbor a far-right viewpoint online is labeled a Marxist who wants to send everyone into reeducation camps. It’s far more socially acceptable to be on the right on social media rather than on the left.
All of the people you listed are on the left. The reason Feminist Frequency and MTV News are hated is because they are full of shit. TAA is an all-out socialist leftist. He just doesn’t like identity politics. Idk about Sargon but he’s not right of center.
Why is identity politics bad then?
Because not all people of a race or gender are the same? It doesn’t even pertain to this conversation. The point was that you were accusing leftists of being far-right purely because they’re opposed to identity politics. The reason MTV and Feminist Frequency are extreme is because they blame men and white people for everything, and they also overreact to non-issues, like video games.
What are non-issues to you are aggressions to the marginalized. It’s like Chinese water torture: a single drop of water seems harmless to you, but imagine thousands of them after a long period of time and let’s see how you feel. Besides, men and/or white people have been doing shitty things to people for hundreds of years, and people pretend that it’s not going on right now. Instead they constantly blame victims (“black people CAN BE racist”) so we end up losing focus on the real issue yelling at each other about semantics.
Well, none of the people on MTV or the woman on Feminist Frequency is marginalized. Video games are not Chinese water torture and women and non-white people have been doing shitty things to people for hundreds of years too, but I don’t blame women and non-white people for the actions of those people because I don’t believe that all women and non-whites are the same because I’m not a racist. Your argument is a perfect example of why I’m opposed to identity politics. It involves blaming everyone for the actions of some and excusing the actions of some because they claim to be marginalized.
Fuck it, you’ll just dismiss my arguments anyways.
Well I have been responding to it.
The Person in Question
So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?
perhaps we could figure that out by looking at what people back then wrote about that weather. They may not have recorded exact temperatures, but they surely talked about the weather. Surely some understanding about the weather back then could be gained.
It wouldn’t be possible to determine temperatures from that. It’s really hard to tell if a year is two degrees colder without a thermometer.
The Person in Question
So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?
perhaps we could figure that out by looking at what people back then wrote about that weather. They may not have recorded exact temperatures, but they surely talked about the weather. Surely some understanding about the weather back then could be gained.
It wouldn’t be possible to determine temperatures from that. It’s really hard to tell if a year is two degrees colder without a thermometer.
I am not talking about exact temperatures, estimates and other info about weather patterns.
So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?
perhaps we could figure that out by looking at what people back then wrote about that weather. They may not have recorded exact temperatures, but they surely talked about the weather. Surely some understanding about the weather back then could be gained.
It wouldn’t be possible to determine temperatures from that. It’s really hard to tell if a year is two degrees colder without a thermometer.
I am not talking about exact temperatures, estimates and other info about weather patterns.
It wouldn’t be very reliable. The small increases in temperature are important in the grand scheme but not noticeable by individuals in the moment, especially since it takes a while to add up. I also don’t think there are even many medieval sources that describe daily weather.
The Person in Question
very well, I leave it up to the scientists to determine whether not there is a way to determine the weather in the middle ages.
Y’all want to get acquainted with paleoclimatology.
Y’all want to get acquainted with paleoclimatology.
ah ha!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/donald-trumps-bizarre-inauguration-concert-9656487
And yet, no Scott Baio?
Where were you in '77?
I suppose he’s hearkening to the “Earth has gone through several heating and cooling periods through the eons, so what we’re experiencing now is nothing new or unnatural” argument against AGW.
I would argue that it doesn’t matter whether the earth was once a billion degrees on the surface a hundred million years ago, but it does matter if the ocean levels raise 10 inches within the next hundred years.
Will they? I dunno. Be worth trying to figure out and attempt to prevent though.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
As far as Global Warming is concerned, I believe that there is plenty of evidence to conclusively say whether or not humans are substantially involved in planetary warming and predict many of the deleterious effects of said warming. However, I personally have
In fact, I don’t think that any single person knows enough to say with certainty anything about AGW, as it is a question uniquely suited to a large network of people pursuing disparate yet parallel lines of investigation. In fact, if anyone were to claim that they knew conclusively that AGW was a myth, I would ask to see how many lifetimes they have spent investigating the problem.
Therefore, I will refer to the scientists on this one, and the vast majority say we should be concerned. So I will be concerned.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
Nope, it doesn’t bother me one bit. Furthermore, I absolutely doubt that we can either change or affect it whatsoever. Besides, a warmer earth even by a degree is better for us, it allows more crops to flourish among many other things.
Plus, shall I again remind you “recorded history” is only the last 140 years? Unless you believe a young earth, then that’s pretty bad science to base an entire theory about the planet based only on .0000000001% of the earths history.
Meteorological charts go back to 1850 (thermometers etc) - so you’re getting on for 170 years. Still a small portion of the Earth’s history - but a reasonable point to measure when factoring in comparisons for the age of the Second Industrial Revolution (factories, urbanisation, smoke, grit, dust, grime, gas and chemicals, coal and mining taking place on a more ‘industrial’ scale leading to engines - powering and use of).
.
To the later question of ‘So, do you think it was hotter or colder during the Middle Ages?’ - that’s a wider-ranging question, when and where? At which point in the Middle Ages? Circa 1000 when some believe there to have been the Little Ice Age? Or the Warming Period in SouthEast Asia & parts of Northern Europe around the same time?
Am off too bed now (late in the UK) - but am curious as to your answer and why (as well as where and when).
You decide.
You want me to decide your answers to my questions - and also why you posed them?
A little patience goes a long way on this old-school Rebel base. If you are having issues finding what you are looking for, these will be of some help…
Welcome to the OriginalTrilogy.com | Introduce yourself in here | Useful info within : About : Help : Site Rules : Fan Project Rules : Announcements
‘How do I do this?’ on the OriginalTrilogy.com; some info & answers + FAQs - includes info on how to search for projects and threads on the OT•com
A Project Index for Star Wars Preservations (Harmy’s Despecialized & 4K77/80/83 etc) : A Project Index for Star Wars Fan Edits (adywan & Hal 9000 etc)
… and take your time to look around this site before posting - to get a feel for this place. Don’t just lazily make yet another thread asking for projects.
