Members mvan1 Posted July 21, 2018 Members Share Posted July 21, 2018 Just now, TotallyOz said: It will NEVER happen. I grew up in the Bible belt and people who believe in things based on faith vs fact have no desire to change anything as it is their faith that sustains them. While what you wrote is true, I still remain optimistic that I can save poor Bucky. He cannot possibly be as dense and misguided as he appears in his presentation and supporting clips for his misguided thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted July 21, 2018 Share Posted July 21, 2018 48 minutes ago, mvan1 said: While what you wrote is true, I still remain optimistic that I can save poor Bucky. He cannot possibly be as dense and misguided as he appears in his presentation and supporting clips for his misguided thinking. I met him years back in Thailand. I thought he was articulate and handsome. I think his online personality on this site is totally different from who he really is or how he participates in other forums. I may be wrong but the Gay Thailand forums don't have a lot of politics on them. I love politics even though it gets messy at times. BTW: he is not looking to be saved. He has seen the light and the Lord has guided him to Trump. He will never see this is against his own interests and we will never understand his rationale. I have many family members just like him (his beliefs) and they are happy to be in their bubble. AdamSmith and mvan1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 21, 2018 Members Share Posted July 21, 2018 I live in the world of facts. If I did not think the aeronautical principles were fact, I would have been dead a long time ago. But I also live in the world of faith. I have faith that the wing won't fall off, the engine won't quit, etc. Regardless I also believe in trust but verify. I do check out the aircraft before I fly it but such inspections can only go so far. Therefore I am back to faith. What does all this have to do with Bucky? I don't believe anyone is trying to kill him or put him in jail but I also don't think many are giving him the leave to have his own beliefs. I have faith. Best regards, RA1 Bucknaway1614502762 and BigK 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted July 21, 2018 Share Posted July 21, 2018 2 hours ago, RA1 said: I live in the world of facts. If I did not think the aeronautical principles were fact, I would have been dead a long time ago. But I also live in the world of faith. I have faith that the wing won't fall off, the engine won't quit, etc. Regardless I also believe in trust but verify. I do check out the aircraft before I fly it but such inspections can only go so far. Therefore I am back to faith. What does all this have to do with Bucky? I don't believe anyone is trying to kill him or put him in jail but I also don't think many are giving him the leave to have his own beliefs. I have faith. Best regards, RA1 The majority of Republicans do not believe in global warming. Is that based in fact? The majority of Republicans believe that white people are discriminated against. Is that based on fact? I could go on. But, yes aeronautical principals are based on fact. And, I love you trust and verify. I don't see many in that party doing the same. Blind faith is never a good thing. mvan1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 21, 2018 Members Share Posted July 21, 2018 I do not have blind faith. Trust and verify. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mvan1 Posted July 21, 2018 Members Share Posted July 21, 2018 5 hours ago, RA1 said: I don't believe anyone is trying to kill him or put him in jail but I also don't think many are giving him the leave to have his own beliefs. If Bucky's misguided allegiance to Trump was related to his own "beliefs" I would say, fine and let it go. However, the words and numerous links Bucky presented in this thread have nothing to do with beliefs. Rather, what Bucky presented is misguided trust in someone (Trump) who is a very convincing liar until you add up the thousands of lies and contradictions Trump told publicly just since he took office. How many lies Trump told prior to becoming president is not possible to estimate. If Bucky really were to believe in an honest and truthful Trump, I would be happy. But, there is no honest and truthful Trump. Honesty and truth are not part of Trump's world. Bucky appears to be misguided by Trump, the former television "reality showman" who knows how to manipulate people through entertainment and fantasy and lies. One, of many examples of Trump's ability to fool people was through his fake "Trump University " that was ruled by the courts to be a fraud. To the extent there were available funds left in the shame university, "students" (those who were tricked into believing they were attending a real university), got refunds to the tune of thirty million dollars, as ordered by the court. Those students had been fooled and cheated by the con man Trump - "beliefs" had nothing to do with being conned by a convincing liar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 21, 2018 Members Share Posted July 21, 2018 There is no reality; only perception. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 6 hours ago, RA1 said: There is no reality; only perception. Best regards, RA1 One may ask how doubling of atmospheric carbon from 200ppm to 400ppm since 1840, and the planet being now hotter than any time in the past 10 million years, is not 'reality.' It you deny that, then you deny all of scientific method. Those are not 'political' assertions, they are documented scientific measurements. mvan1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 22, 2018 Members Share Posted July 22, 2018 Remember hypothesis becomes theory based upon facts until there is perhaps a new interpretation of the facts. Earth seems to be warmer now than before. Why is a hypothesis. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 8 minutes ago, RA1 said: Remember hypothesis becomes theory based upon facts until there is perhaps a new interpretation of the facts. Earth seems to be warmer now than before. Why is a hypothesis. Best regards, RA1 The effect of atmospheric carbon on heat retention is a 'hypothesis'? Surely you must be joking, Mr Feynman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Latbear4blk Posted July 22, 2018 Members Share Posted July 22, 2018 Fact: Fact: AdamSmith 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RockHardNYC Posted July 22, 2018 Members Share Posted July 22, 2018 On 7/20/2018 at 10:14 PM, TotallyOz said: I think his online personality on this site is totally different from who he really is or how he participates in other forums. I can relate to that. On 7/20/2018 at 10:14 PM, TotallyOz said: I have many family members just like him (his beliefs) and they are happy to be in their bubble. 99.9% of my cousins are gun-loving Republicans (huge family of White breeders). Some of these Catholics held their nose and voted for Trump. A few are dealing with regret. Unfortunately, power, guns, and lower taxes are all some people care about. Many will make a pact with the devil if it means acquiring those things. 2 hours ago, Latbear4blk said: Fact: Does this mean Jesus sent us Donald Trump to save Christianity and civilization? Holy shit! God help us all. Latbear4blk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 22, 2018 Members Share Posted July 22, 2018 2 hours ago, AdamSmith said: The effect of atmospheric carbon on heat retention is a 'hypothesis'? Surely you must be joking, Mr Feynman. A theory at best. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 7 hours ago, RA1 said: A theory at best. Your use of the word as an apparent derogative is most puzzling. Theory From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search For theories in science, see scientific theory. For other uses, see Theory (disambiguation). Part of a series on Certainty Approximation Belief Certainty Doubt Determinism Fallibilism Fatalism Hypothesis Justification Nihilism Proof Scientific theory Skepticism Solipsism Theory Truth Uncertainty Related concepts and fundamentals: Agnosticism Epistemology Presupposition Probability v t e A theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking.[citation needed] Depending on the context, the results might, for example, include generalized explanations of how nature works. The word has its roots in ancient Greek, but in modern use it has taken on several related meanings. Theories guide the enterprise of finding facts rather than of reaching goals, and are neutral concerning alternatives among values.[1]:131 A theory can be a body of knowledge, which may or may not be associated with particular explanatory models. To theorize is to develop this body of knowledge.[2]:46 As already in Aristotle's definitions, theory is very often contrasted to "practice" (from Greek praxis, πρᾶξις) a Greek term for doing, which is opposed to theory because pure theory involves no doing apart from itself. A classical example of the distinction between "theoretical" and "practical" uses the discipline of medicine: medical theory involves trying to understand the causes and nature of health and sickness, while the practical side of medicine is trying to make people healthy. These two things are related but can be independent, because it is possible to research health and sickness without curing specific patients, and it is possible to cure a patient without knowing how the cure worked.[a] In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific tests should be able to provide empirical support for, or empirically contradict ("falsify") it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge,[3] in contrast to more common uses of the word "theory" that imply that something is unproven or speculative (which in formal terms is better characterized by the word hypothesis).[4] Scientific theories are distinguished from hypotheses, which are individual empirically testable conjectures, and from scientific laws, which are descriptive accounts of how nature behaves under certain conditions. Contents [hide] 1Ancient uses 2Theories formally and scientifically 2.1Underdetermination 2.2Intertheoretic reduction and elimination 2.3Theories vs. theorems 3Scientific theories 3.1Definitions from scientific organizations 3.2Philosophical views 3.3In physics 3.4The term theoretical 4Philosophical theories 4.1Metatheory 5Political theories 6Jurisprudential theories 7List of notable theories 8See also 9Notes 10References 10.1Citations 10.2Sources 11External links Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 23, 2018 Members Share Posted July 23, 2018 I have no low opinion of theories. I just do not necessarily think they are "forever". Various interpretations of facts can and do exist. These lead to hypothesis and perhaps theories. I think we have no disagreement about what a theory is. We apparently have a disagreement about the interpretation of the facts surrounding climate warming. Because you intend to live forever I will depend upon you to inform me how the climate is doing, say 1000 years from now. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 48 minutes ago, RA1 said: I have no low opinion of theories. I just do not necessarily think they are "forever". Various interpretations of facts can and do exist. These lead to hypothesis and perhaps theories. I think we have no disagreement about what a theory is. We apparently have a disagreement about the interpretation of the facts surrounding climate warming. Because you intend to live forever I will depend upon you to inform me how the climate is doing, say 1000 years from now. Best regards, RA1 I am talking known carbon/atmosphere science. I was a chemical engineer first year of college. What are you talking? Your discourse does not have concrete content. mvan1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 23, 2018 Members Share Posted July 23, 2018 I am relying upon the fact that no one truly knows Earth's climate cycles. Therefore the interpretation of the CO2, etc, extant in the atmosphere is subject to change. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mvan1 Posted July 23, 2018 Members Share Posted July 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, RA1 said: I am relying upon the fact that no one truly knows Earth's climate cycles. Therefore the interpretation of the CO2, etc, extant in the atmosphere is subject to change. Best regards, RA1 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/feb/01/its-not-okay-how-clueless-donald-trump-is-about-climate-change and https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/05/pruitt-resignation-epa-schwarzenegger-696630 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 56 minutes ago, RA1 said: I am relying upon the fact that no one truly knows Earth's climate cycles. Therefore the interpretation of the CO2, etc, extant in the atmosphere is subject to change. That is just nonsense. The extant research is exhaustive and conclusive. As @mvan1's citations above document. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 23, 2018 Members Share Posted July 23, 2018 We will have to disagree on this one. Sorry. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 4 hours ago, RA1 said: We will have to disagree on this one. Sorry. Best regards, RA1 ...climate-change is supported by evidence so strong as to be virtually incontrovertible. The scientific consensus is that our climate is changing rapidly, with the unmistakable fingerprints of human meddling making it clear we’re responsible for rising global temperatures. The mechanism behind this has long been known - French Polymath Joseph Fourier hypothesized human impact on climate in 1827, with effects of greenhouse gases demonstrated experimentally by Irish Physicist John Tyndall in 1864. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/21/mobile-phones-are-not-a-health-hazard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 So it must be a modern-day left wing conspiracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mvan1 Posted July 24, 2018 Members Share Posted July 24, 2018 4 hours ago, AdamSmith said: So it must be a modern-day left wing conspiracy. It is not a conspiracy - it is merely something that Trump promotes. Trump does not want to accept facts that contradict him despite his being wrong. Trump's followers accept anything he says whether or not it has any factual basis. AdamSmith and TotallyOz 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, mvan1 said: It is not a conspiracy - it is merely something that Trump does not want to accept. Plain and simple. Those who follow Trump, follow his thinking, hence, the global warming is a "witch hunt" like everything else Trump does not want to accept. Climate change means the end of our species in like 200-300 years, or likely sooner, so one wonders why they (and we!) are even wasting breath on it. mvan1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 24, 2018 Members Share Posted July 24, 2018 11 hours ago, AdamSmith said: ...climate-change is supported by evidence so strong as to be virtually incontrovertible. The scientific consensus is that our climate is changing rapidly, with the unmistakable fingerprints of human meddling making it clear we’re responsible for rising global temperatures. The mechanism behind this has long been known - French Polymath Joseph Fourier hypothesized human impact on climate in 1827, with effects of greenhouse gases demonstrated experimentally by Irish Physicist John Tyndall in 1864. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/21/mobile-phones-are-not-a-health-hazard Suppose all of this is exactly correct. Are you willing to give up the various improvements of the last say 200 years? Cutting down trees, developing carbon based fuels and all the other things we have done either right or wrong seem to go hand in hand with living longer, being well fed, being more comfortable, etc. Apparently we could not have one without the other. What is your solution to counter climate change? Carbon tax is a political ploy. Various other solutions are either impractical or impossible. The Earth is over populated for the technology we now have. But, reducing the population does not seem viable either. Have you bought your ticket to the Moon or Mars yet? Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
