[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
What is the value of the State?
On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 02:51:02PM -0300, juan wrote:
> On Sat, 6 May 2017 02:32:47 -0400
> John Newman <jnn at synfin.org> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > What's your evidence that anthropogenic climate change is a massive
> > hoax? I know we've been through this before and I don't want another
> > flame fest.... I'm genuinely curious.
>
>
> http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html
>
> I might as well ask, what's your evidence for human caused
> 'global' warming, apart from the official story coming from the
> 'scientific' 'community'.
>
> Where are your *global* temperature records? What about records
> for solar activity...? How old is the earth's climate? How far
> do your records go?
>
> What's the theory that allows you to 'predict' the wheather? How
> reliable is it? What about so called 'chaos' theory? Have you
> ever bothered to see how accurate the one-week weather forecast
> is?
The theory is very simple. Carbon emissions trap heat and cause a
greenhouse effect which, averaged over time, causes a rise in global
termperatures. This is a rise that is backed up by data. Effects
beyond this are, I think, very hard to predict.. you mentioned chaos
theory :P Some generalizations seem obvious, though, and obviously
bad. None of it has anything to do with predicting next week's
weather.
>
>
> >
> > I ask because I've had some long conversations with people much
> > smarter than myself whose area of research involves this, and the
> > basic premise seems pretty simple and well established.
>
> Well, it seems to me that you believe what the 'scientific'
> 'authorities' say. So you believe in authority, and that has
> nothing to do with science.
>
I defer to rational thought. It seems to me you have an inability to
acknowledge that there are people out there doing legitamite science,
who may know more about a subject than you. It has nothing to do with
authority the way you've framed it. No one has a gun to my head telling
me to believe in this particular theory - I believe it on its perceived
merits.
Anyway, further argument I think will degenerate, and I'm fucking sick
of toxic shit, but thanks for the answer :P
>
> > Debating the
> > nitty gritty details of how quickly we are warming the planet with
> > carbon emissions and what exactly the effect is and will continue to
> > be, on weather patterns, the oceans, permafrost, etc etc -
> > discussing this can obviously be done...
> >
> > It's not like anyone (the nation states of the world) is particularly
> > doing anything to really fight the effect,
>
> I don't think there's much of an effect to fight, but it is
> obvious that there are 'government activities' related to
> 'climate change'. And those 'government activities' boil down to
> transferring money from joe sixpack to 'green' special
> interests.
>
>
> > except for very token
> > gestures.
>
> I don't think that the tens of billions of dollars that go to
> special interests including of course the 'scientific' mafia
> are a token gesture.
>
>
>
> > In other words, if it's a massive hoax perpetuated by
> > scientists all over the world, they and the various institutions they
> > represent aren't really getting anything from said hoax.
>
> I think that illustrates your bias. You think the 'climate
> change' story benefits no one although your belief is pretty
> naive and can be dispelled with 5 minutes searching for "green
> subsidies" or similar terms.
>
>
> And anyway, I wasn't too interested in discussing global
> warming, but cyber totalitarianism.
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >> Your version of Political
> > >> Correctness provides final answers to all meaningful questions
> > >> about the human condition. That sounds more like conventional
> > >> religious fanaticism than the Scientician faith.
> > >
> > >
> > > bottom line : you criticize the scientific mafia ONLY if they
> > > say stuff you don't like. When your scientfic, state-funded
> > > mafia vomits nonsense about the global reheating apocalypsis,ii
> > > you love them.
> > >
> > >
> > >>> The technological, fascist 'progressives' are basically correct
> > >>> when they say that all technical problems can be solved. So if you
> > >>> expect their technical plans to catastrophically fail, you'll wait
> > >>> forever.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution
> > >>>
> > >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WaUkZXKA30
> > >>
> > >> There's that Scientician faith in action!
> > >
> > >
> > > Not sure what you mean. Do you have any counterarguments for
> > > Huxley?
> > >
> > > So far, apart from your enviro-friendly, off-topic tangent, I
> > > don't think you said anything too relevant to the problem of
> > > technically efficient propaganda, brainwashing, mind-control or
> > > whatever term is appropriate.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
--
John
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20170508/0764c7ef/attachment.sig>