12 years to save the planet

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
MikeN
Poster
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

12 years to save the planet

Post by MikeN » Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:28 pm

This is the latest mantra from the global warming alarmists.
Beto O'Rourke, aka Robert Francis O'Rourke, said the scientists are unanimous that there is just 12 years to save the planet.
Notwithstanding that they have been saying this sort of thing for decades, let's assume they are correct this time.

Which of the following do you bet will happen in 2030:
They will declare the planet is doomed, and stop pushing their agenda, and instead switch to an agenda of adapting to the coming changes?

They will declare that we have discovered humanity got lucky and we have another decade to save the planet?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26374
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by scrmbldggs » Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:33 pm

What's your full name, Mike? Is it "Rafael Edward" AKA Ted?
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
psychiatry is a scam
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1506
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:23 am
Custom Title: do not go - into that -

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by psychiatry is a scam » Fri Mar 15, 2019 4:19 am

wpg in 2031 --- 8.6 bill :-(
people adapt / have short / no memory .

doubt they / or anyone ever admits defeat - just the way you umons are.
adapting to change is a daily thing . people will adapt even if shtf.

12 years ? they are lying - lying to themselves .
umons have a tendency towards self deceit

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4706
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by ElectricMonk » Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:11 am

Science - who needs it, right?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:45 am

Science is not prophesy.
Anyone who gets into the prophet game is sticking his neck out ready for the chopper, whether he is a scientist or simply a crystal ball reader.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:45 am

MikeN wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:28 pm
This is the latest mantra from the global warming alarmists.
Beto O'Rourke, aka Robert Francis O'Rourke, said the scientists are unanimous that there is just 12 years to save the planet.
Notwithstanding that they have been saying this sort of thing for decades,...
You could not be more vague than this.

I will assume that 95% of all the predictions made by qualified scientific organizations turned out to be true. The 5% fail rate probably included a failed assumption that once identified and corrected lead to a subsequent 95% prediction.

Science: the only effort that advances human knowledge. A good thing. It proceeds by MAKING PREDICTIONS THAT SON OF A GUN TURN OUT TO BE TRUE.

Ain't that a kick?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Walter
New Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:01 pm

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Walter » Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:24 pm

From Tom Naughton:

Years ago, I read an interview with a researcher who said something like, “If you want to study the migratory patterns of squirrels and you name your proposed study The migratory patterns of squirrels, you won’t get funding. But if you name your proposed study How global warming is impacting the migratory patterns of squirrels, you will get funding.”

By this point, it’s safe to say something similar applies to the world of nutrition studies. If you want to get funding, you need to propose a study named something like Low-Carb Diet Is Linked To [Some Bad Thing].

http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/ ... pid-study/

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:33 pm

Walter: so thats how you get funding. So what?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4706
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by ElectricMonk » Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:02 pm

you only need to get funding until you are an established researcher in your field.
After that, you usually get what you need.

So none of the anecdotes about sensationalist paper titles is relevant: all the papers I read are almost always painfully understated in the impact of their results.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 15, 2019 4:03 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:33 pm
Walter: so thats how you get funding. So what?
So what it shows us is that there's very little IQ controlling the purse strings of grant money. The political aspect of science funding shouldn't be the dominant aspect, that's what.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:14 pm

Ironic that science teaches one about reality, but you don't want reality to apply to how science is funded.

................................ Amusing.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3816
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lausten » Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:00 pm

MikeN wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:28 pm
This is the latest mantra from the global warming alarmists.
Beto O'Rourke, aka Robert Francis O'Rourke, said the scientists are unanimous that there is just 12 years to save the planet.
Notwithstanding that they have been saying this sort of thing for decades, let's assume they are correct this time.

Which of the following do you bet will happen in 2030:
They will declare the planet is doomed, and stop pushing their agenda, and instead switch to an agenda of adapting to the coming changes?

They will declare that we have discovered humanity got lucky and we have another decade to save the planet?
I'll need to fix your question first. Or, you could provide evidence of other times there have predictions, by REAL SCIENTISTS, that AGW is reaching a point where predictions match the current predictions.

Which of the following will happen in 2030:
There will be a small but vocal minority, some of them with their hands on purse strings, who think we should let the unsustainable growth continue as is. Or, there is no "or". What? Did you think people with money were going to suddenly start acting altruistically and caring about the 7th generation?
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:19 pm

Lausten wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:00 pm
MikeN wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:28 pm
This is the latest mantra from the global warming alarmists.
Beto O'Rourke, aka Robert Francis O'Rourke, said the scientists are unanimous that there is just 12 years to save the planet.
Notwithstanding that they have been saying this sort of thing for decades, let's assume they are correct this time.

Which of the following do you bet will happen in 2030:
They will declare the planet is doomed, and stop pushing their agenda, and instead switch to an agenda of adapting to the coming changes?

They will declare that we have discovered humanity got lucky and we have another decade to save the planet?
I'll need to fix your question first. Or, you could provide evidence of other times there have predictions, by REAL SCIENTISTS, that AGW is reaching a point where predictions match the current predictions.

Which of the following will happen in 2030:
There will be a small but vocal minority, some of them with their hands on purse strings, who think we should let the unsustainable growth continue as is. Or, there is no "or". What? Did you think people with money were going to suddenly start acting altruistically and caring about the 7th generation?
First of all, fix your post by removing the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Real science and verifiable data is what counts, not the subjective label of "real scientist." It's not anyone's opinion that actually qualifies a scientist as credible, it's the data itself, and how it squares with actual observation.

Particularly poignant is the way some of these predictions have liberally used regression, often ignoring the correlation factor. But they don't like it when we examine the accuracy factor in their predictions, and see that the correlation factor leaves much to be desired. It's natural that some predictions have been accurate, because that falls within the normal range of probabilities. Many more turn out to be nonsense. The relevant factor is the general average, and how poorly it correlates to reality. You have not demonstrated that that a certain cadre of scientists are making credible predictions, and I welcome you to do so.

I invite you to prove me wrong. Who are the climate scientists with a good track record of making accurate and clear predictions that have correlated to actual events? I want to follow their work.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:43 pm

landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:19 pm
I invite you to prove me wrong. Who are the climate scientists with a good track record of making accurate and clear predictions that have correlated to actual events? I want to follow their work.
The IPCC. There good work is found here: https://www.ipcc.ch/ I invite you to prove me/IPCC wrong.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:44 pm

A comment about science. Science involves collecting data and performing empirical testing . It does NOT involve predicting the future. Predictions only become scientific after the event, so that the correctness or falsity of the prediction can be judged against empirical data. Until that final test is done, the prediction is not science.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:52 pm

That is a very limited view of science Lance. So limited as to be purposefully retarded. Whatever "distinction" you think you are making its ONLY SCIENCE that can lead to accurate predictions.

Lets try this: what is weather foercasting in your mind if not science?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:13 pm

We all do crude science in our heads instinctively, when we've heard a prophet predicting the end of the world by a certain date, and the date comes to pass; nothing happens, so the prophet says "just a small miscalculation, that, all, here's another date;" then that one passes also, and so on and on until no one has any interest in listening to the prophet any more. When you study doomsday predictions and see that they've all been wrong, it's hard to be affected by a doomsday prediction, no matter how scientific they claim it is.

It's just the reality of it.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

MikeN
Poster
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by MikeN » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:14 pm

Bobbo, it sounds like you are betting that the science will change and the current '12 years to save the planet' is wrong.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:15 pm

You know it's more a religion than a science when you question something and they call you the modern-day equivalent of heretic; "denier."
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:15 pm

Jeebus lameone: thats as dumb as sperm are alive. You trying to win arguments by going in reverse? Is that your clever plan?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:23 pm

MikeN wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:14 pm
Bobbo, it sounds like you are betting that the science will change and the current '12 years to save the planet' is wrong.
I didn't look at the claim at all. I assume save the planet means avoid some very bad outcomes that could have been otherwise avoided? CONTRA: did I read the 12 year deal had 3 major components if we wanted to avoid it and the one I agreed with was to deploy asap carbon capturing technology? Yes, I think that is true. I almost posted I disagreed with his first two tennants and that time was indeed drawing near where a full deployment of carbon capturing technology would not save us from whatever specific calamity was called for.

Every term in every equation is loose/vague/general/not even identified..............ha, ha.......and with all the worlds science turned to the single question........I do have half a wish that some carbon capturing tech really could save us all in the nick of time. Evidently .......it will have to be something that the USA/Europe can fund and do all on its own to overcome the A-HOLES in the rest of the world. .........and thats fair enough.

..................and I just saw this morning that Trump has openned up Federal Offshore Coastal areas for oil drilling. You know: kill the fisheries to get oil we should leave in the ground. We really do deserve what is happening right now..............eg..........in USA yesterday I think the strongest frontal ground winds ever recorded in excess of 100 mph filmed blowing a semi-truck over. "IF" someone had been killed.......was that an AGW death, or you know........winds have always blown trucks over?

Lots of fun issues. //// To your point: Yeah, I kind think 12 years is too far out.......make it 8.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:30 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:52 pm
That is a very limited view of science Lance. So limited as to be purposefully retarded. Whatever "distinction" you think you are making its ONLY SCIENCE that can lead to accurate predictions.

Lets try this: what is weather foercasting in your mind if not science?
Weather forecasting is not science. It is a modern trade. It comes from the work of good scientists, but is not itself science.

Science is an exploration. You could define science as "studying the universe using the scientific method ". Not very helpful, of course, since you then have to define the scientific method, and you would need to write an encyclopedia to do that. But the key is that science is a method of finding the truth about the universe. Predictions do not fit into that definition. At least not until the prediction has occurred or not occurred and the empirical results can be assessed.
Last edited by Lance Kennedy on Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:31 pm

Thats exactly how I would describe weather forecasting.

Good man.........now: just listen to your own brain instead of what comes out of your mouth.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:33 pm

Science, Bobbo, is based on empirical results. Those results show that detailed sociological models for predicting the future nearly always fail. So what is the scientific conclusion ?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:40 pm

Are you admiting weather forecasting is science in action? its an easier subject area than the soft science of sociology. Baby steps first.......
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:49 pm

It's a bit like Pascal's wager, given the purported high stakes, it tries to make the argument that you can't afford to be wrong, therefore your best option is just to believe in it.

It's like the tactic I saw when I was a child, and a man came to our house with a movie projector. He showed us a film about how a nice family was wiped out by a fire because they didn't have smoke detectors installed in their house. Of course he was selling the most expensive kind. He wasn't wrong, and he told no lies, but we needn't have spent thousands of dollars (at the time) when better options were available.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:04 pm

Everything is like everything else. Then.......there are differences too. You have to evaluate both sides of the equation.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:07 pm

Good Old Trump: going to ruin coastal fisheries to drill for more oil and REJECT the study/research for climate-cooling technologies. Its like the guy is an AGW SATAN!!!! or something as evilly fork tailed:

ie: we should be engaged RIGHT NOW in a WW3 effort to develop carbon sequestration. Silly not to. I like turning co2 into limestone and make buildings with it...........a two fer for sure, plus: our grandkiddies get to live.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-envi ... SKCN1QV2RL
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 11783
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by OlegTheBatty » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:18 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:44 pm
A comment about science. Science involves collecting data and performing empirical testing . It does NOT involve predicting the future. Predictions only become scientific after the event, so that the correctness or falsity of the prediction can be judged against empirical data. Until that final test is done, the prediction is not science.
How do you test a hypothesis that does not make a prediction?
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3816
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lausten » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:42 pm

landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:19 pm
First of all, fix your post by removing the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Real science and verifiable data is what counts, not the subjective label of "real scientist." It's not anyone's opinion that actually qualifies a scientist as credible, it's the data itself, and how it squares with actual observation.
You're really bad at the whole "name the fallacy" thing. I'll accept an error in semantics. I should have said "anyone basing their statement on science". That would include anyone who does what you described, based their statement on established data. A child could do it. But you're right, there is no definition of "scientist". If you are following the methods of science, that's what's important.
landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:19 pm
I invite you to prove me wrong. Who are the climate scientists with a good track record of making accurate and clear predictions that have correlated to actual events? I want to follow their work.
Mike made the claim, but anyway. I'd like to do that work, but it's kind of already done. I don't really have that kind of time. It would be easier if Mike could just give an example of what he's saying and prove me wrong, rather than me providing hundreds of examples of accurate predictions. He must have something in mind, or why would he make such a claim? Could it be he has some headline from 1975 in mind? That's what I usually see in these cases.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:56 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:40 pm
Are you admiting weather forecasting is science in action? its an easier subject area than the soft science of sociology. Baby steps first.......
A big part of everything we do these days is "science in action ". But it is not practicing science. Practicing science is using empirical tests to discover stuff. Not weather forecasting.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:00 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:18 pm


How do you test a hypothesis that does not make a prediction?
True. But please read what I posted in context. The context is responding to those who think that making detailed and specific predictions 80 years in advance is science. It is not. It is fallacy.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:31 pm

Weather forecasting is the application of science and technology to predict the conditions of the atmosphere for a given location and time. People have attempted to predict the weather informally for millennia and formally since the 19th century.
Weather forecasting - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_forecasting

Long range forecasting: the predictions are not as certain, but its not astrology.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:10 am

Yes, and a modern car is an application of science and technology to transport. But a mechanic is not a scientist.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:17 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:10 am
Yes, and a modern car is an application of science and technology to transport. But a mechanic is not a scientist.
And no one but you has said they are. This is a whole field of straw. TOTALLY UNADDRESSED: weather prediction is quite accurate and very scientific. Lance: you really need to ...........chill.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:26 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:17 am
weather prediction is quite accurate and very scientific. Lance: you really need to ...........chill.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 16, 2019 6:14 pm

Well landrew: emphasizing the humor eh? I can't tell if you get "my" joke........or if you are laughing at my post......or the every popular combo plate...which in this case is possible if you swing both ways. Another joke...but not AGW oriented which also ties back in. Word Play.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 12521
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sat Mar 16, 2019 6:52 pm

Laughing at you, Bobbo.

You do not know what a Scientist is.

For your information, a scientist is a kind of explorer, using the scientific method to uncover truths about the universe. There are, of course, meteorological scientists, using science to discover more about weather phenomena. But a forecaster is not doing science when he is just using already discovered principles to determine what the weather may be tomorrow.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10049
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:16 pm

This government website explains that using massive computing and remote sensing resources, they can only achieve 80% accuracy for a 7 day forecast. Going beyond that is just belief in hand-waving and witchcraft.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 17743
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: 12 years to save the planet

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:06 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 6:52 pm
Laughing at you, Bobbo.

You do not know what a Scientist is.

For your information, a scientist is a kind of explorer, using the scientific method to uncover truths about the universe. There are, of course, meteorological scientists, using science to discover more about weather phenomena. But a forecaster is not doing science when he is just using already discovered principles to determine what the weather may be tomorrow.
I say he is. Where does that put us? //// OH....I see. Well...........the FORECASTER is just the talking head that is delivering what the meteorological scientist has produced for him. Silly you don't see that...... or want to argue about it. Why not be more flexible???
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?