Contact   Imprint   Advertising   Guidelines

Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Forum for kitesurfers
Blackened
Medium Poster
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 4:47 am
Kiting since: 2012
Style: Big Air, Airstyle
Gear: 2018 North Rebel 15m
2018 North Evo 12/10m
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby Blackened » Thu Oct 31, 2019 9:36 am

foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
How about we kill all the Dolphins so they can eat them and not go hungry or die? When they have more kids we can then kill another species for them and another after that? You don't seem to understand Evolution, it involves selection. That means somethings die and some don't, some reproduce and some don't. If you have no selection, i.e. death there is no evolution. Fortunately this is a scientific fact unlike stupid climate models. So whether you believe in it or not whether you try to circumvent it with immunizations or free hand outs and other silly tricks you ultimately will not bypass it, the death is just delayed and the selection is inevitable.
Good lord, wtf are you talking about? My statement literally had nothing to do with evolution. I was talking about how shit humans are. And that's not how evolution works. It doesn't magically ignore people with immunizations. "Oh, that guy had a vaccine! I'm just not going to apply to him!" If you successfully reproduce, passing on your genetic material, that's it. Job done. It doesn't matter if you're faster than a predator, outsmarted a virus, or got a mutation that allowed you to grow aerobically on citrate.
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
There once was a consensus of experts that believed the earth was flat, sun went around the earth etc. What happened to the people that went against that consensus?
No there wasn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
The problem is fucking with the data is becoming all to common in what now may as well be called pseudosciences. https://realclimatescience.com/2018/12/ ... rm-period/
Reading this site was very interesting. I haven't much looked into anti-GW stuff as I previously dismissed it as tinfoil hat nonsense. This particular page was well put together and even references the report it says the IPCC is "trying to hide" (because it tells the truth). Thankfully, they somehow managed to find it after it was "hidden" because of Google's wayback machine. I was shocked when the report was exactly as this the site said. It talked a lot about this medieval warming period the IPCC is trying to hide from us. I was quite astounded. I even found it so interesting, I decided to read a little more. Turns out the global mean stayed relatively the same, while there was a period of warming for about 250 years, mainly isolated to Europe. Damnit, I knew I should've stopped after I read only the supporting information for the website, but I stupidly just had read a couple more paragraphs.

Do you anti-GW people even read this stuff? Or just find a couple quotes, take them out of context, then sing, "HAHA! GOTYA!!!"? Please don't reference anti-global warming conspiracy sites. It's the same nonsense over and over with a complete lack of understanding of anything science related. Ironically, they seem to have the ability to disprove themselves with their own references, just as you seem to have a problem with doing in this thread..
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
What model is your time machine? The belief that rules of the universe have never changed is a theory in science that things are as they always have been. The big bang theory stems solely from observation of movement of the universe, it is moving from a point so it must have come from a point. It is as it has always been. What happened at the point? well lets just make up some religious sounding story about that should we? Ultimately these are all guesses at best, there is no way we have to confirm them, like for what is at the center of the sun or is the temperature of venus, until well we send something there.

I think it is great we have more educated guesses than well GOD WILLED IT, but they are still guesses. They are of actual little help for us, unless they stimulate more thought to find something applicable to now. They actually given discussions like this around climate seem to be a negative as they like religious belief or any dogma stifle thought and discussion. Science can ultimately only prove what it can test and create, let me know when they stay start making big bangs and resulting universes. Yes I am fucking aware of colliders and attempt to recreate the same "conditions" but they won't make a big band, black hole maybe but big bang highly unlikely. It is just approximation of approximation etc. Certainly interesting things will be found, and I am a huge supporter of science in that regard. I am just not a supporter of pseudoscience, social science, economics, bullllshit, etc. Everyone has a right to carry any line of thinking that they want, just don't fucking ask me to pay for crap like Gender studies and SLS rockets to nowhere.
So, you're telling me that because we're not 100% sure that physics hasn't changed and have seen no evidence of it changing in the past 13.7 billion years, we should just assume it may have been wildly different? Well, then perhaps I shouldn't assume gravity won't suddenly reverse so I should put pads on the ceiling?

Perhaps there's another set of physics that explains things on a universal scale that we haven't yet discovered. As for now, it's by far the best fit for the observable evidence using existing mathematical models. Also, the big bang has neither a start point nor an end point. Your presupposing human limitations on an infinite platform. Lastly, please stop talking about astrophysics, physics, and astronomy. Everything you said shows a significant misunderstanding and your reframing of information is dangerous (admittedly, I don't think you're doing it on purpose).

In case you needed a refresher on the scientific method: https://www.ducksters.com/science/scientificmethod.php. There's quite a lot of information there on physics and astronomy for you as well. https://www.ducksters.com/science/ Should help bring you up to speed at least a little :).
I don't know what you're trying to say. If it was to back up my statement about theories need adjustments when they don't work in specific areas, or that they're replaced with something that explains it a bit better, but the original stands true for the set it was designed for...thanks? You do know there's a whole field of physics trying to unite quantum mechanics and relativity, right? Actually, probably not.

foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
Correct. The same can be said for most aspects of human belief be it flat earth or god. I read this when I was a young child, by a truly great writer.

https://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience ... fWrong.htm
This is a very excellent article you've referenced. So unbelievably perfect for this response to you.

"What actually happens is that once scientists get hold of a good concept they gradually refine and extend it with greater and greater subtlety as their instruments of measurement improve. Theories are not so much wrong as incomplete." - About 5/6 the way down the page.

Also, Asimov was one of the first well known science communicators (and scientists!) coming out in support of global warming. In 1989 he gave a keynote address and said, “They wanted me to pick out the most important scientific event of 1988. And I really thought that the most important scientific event of 1988 will only be recognized sometime in the future when you get a little perspective.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6tSYRY90PA
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
Blackened wrote:
If you disagree with almost every scientist and have some insight on data that has not been shown, perhaps you should do a climate science degree and get some papers published in reputable science journals.

I am not interested to that level. I think you will find Economics and Politics are the most dire problems we face in the immediate. We will be lucky to survive Trump. I struggle to think of solutions to them, I think principles of openness and freedom are the only thing that will work. It is sad to see the lack of leaks after Edward Snowden and now the torture of Julian Assange in the UK. Ability to leak information from real conspiracies that do evil are the only real defense we have against them. The increasing suppression of freedom and polluting of discourse with bots and propaganda is having a toll and will I think lead to the down fall of the current enlightenment. The Navy now has an army of bots engaged in political discourse on things like twitter. It's insane. Only defense is to largely disengage from the worst platforms and harden up on logic skills.
So, instead of doing a degree, you're going to spout off about stuff you know literally nothing about? And since you brought him up as someone you admire and enjoy reading, Asimov wrote many, many series on science education, including a 3 volume on Understanding Physics.

"Anti- intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov

slide
Medium Poster
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:54 pm
Kiting since: 2003
Local Beach: Brancaster Norfolk 46 miles
Favorite Beaches: mablephorpe , cleephorpes
Style: landboarding with a work harness
Gear: old blades and old flysurfer's , ckb/dex carbon decks/and now 6/8/10/12 soul, 15 spd5
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: east anglia, uk
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 3 times
Contact:

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby slide » Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:07 pm

and the wildfires fanned by heavy winds just keep growing ,as we see

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2918
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 139 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby foilholio » Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm

Ok so you are getting quite complicated on this and using many logical fallacies. I am going to bring it down to one point at a time so we stick to that and discuss ok?
Blackened wrote:
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:12 am
The problem is fucking with the data is becoming all to common in what now may as well be called pseudosciences. https://realclimatescience.com/2018/12/ ... rm-period/
Reading this site was very interesting. I haven't much looked into anti-GW stuff as I previously dismissed it as tinfoil hat nonsense. This particular page was well put together and even references the report it says the IPCC is "trying to hide" (because it tells the truth). Thankfully, they somehow managed to find it after it was "hidden" because of Google's wayback machine. I was shocked when the report was exactly as this the site said. It talked a lot about this medieval warming period the IPCC is trying to hide from us. I was quite astounded. I even found it so interesting, I decided to read a little more. Turns out the global mean stayed relatively the same, while there was a period of warming for about 250 years, mainly isolated to Europe. Damnit, I knew I should've stopped after I read only the supporting information for the website, but I stupidly just had read a couple more paragraphs.
You say that the medieval warming period was limited to just Europe? I am aware of this assertion too!

Would you say Greenland is part of Europe?

Would you say North America is part of Europe?

Are you aware the temperature graph shown on that page illustrating the medieval warming period uses data from California, Greenland and England?

What do you think of this video?



I believe Michael Mann is responsible for the removal of the medieval warming period from the IPCC. The same Michael Mann who pushed heavily grossly over estimating models which we now know are completely wrong and the famous and now discredited "hockey stick". Maybe this link will interest you.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/09/14/ ... after-all/

In fact if you listen to Mann he is nuts.



He is pushing weather events as climate. This is in fact a common tactic climate alarmists use to push any weather event that suits to bring alarm as being a result of climate change. But as climate alarmists will have you know if a weather event is of record cold or just cold or just against the perception they are trying to create around climate change then the mantra from them is "weather is not climate". Which is true but you can't fairly play it both ways.

But sorry for digressing lets stick to the Medieval warming period. What evidence do you have it didn't occur? Weather stations in South America? Satellite data? Sorry just playing. Maybe some ice core data? Yes ice cores....

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/ea ... arm-period

That link is full of statements for the medieval warming period but lets take a few quotes shall we.
An ice core from the eastern Antarctic Peninsula shows warmer temperatures during this period.
Oxygen isotope studies in Greenland, Ireland, Germany, Switzerland, Tibet, China, New Zealand, and elsewhere, plus tree-ring data from many sites around the world all confirm the presence of a global Medieval Warm Period
I wonder if New Zealand is part of Europe? Sorry I just can't help myself :-)
Evidence that the MWP was a global event is so widespread that one wonders why Mann et al. (1998) ignored it. Over a period of many decades, several thousand papers were published establishing the MWP from about 900 ADto 1300 AD. Thus, it came as quite a surprise when Mann et al. (1998), on the basis of a single tree-ring study, concluded that neither the MWP nor the Little Ice Age actually happened
This Mann man must have some issue, he looks like a cuck I feel like he somehow drifted out of a social studies department pretending to be a physicist. For those maybe needing help MWP is medieval warming period.

So hey you want to do science lets do science!

Stay on track, I know I set a poor example but you can out do me!

MWP why didn't it happen?

Because I think it did happen.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/image ... _china.pdf
The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a global climatic anomaly that encompassed a few centuries on either side of AD 1000, when temperatures in many parts of the world were even warmer than they are currently.
with extreme January minimum temperatures fully 3.5°C warmer than they are today
Makes sense that in winter if it was that warm that Greenland was actually appropriately named!

Blackened
Medium Poster
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 4:47 am
Kiting since: 2012
Style: Big Air, Airstyle
Gear: 2018 North Rebel 15m
2018 North Evo 12/10m
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby Blackened » Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:14 am

foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
Ok so you are getting quite complicated on this and using many logical fallacies.
No. I'm mocking your inability to read your conspiracy's own reference material.
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
You say that the medieval warming period was limited to just Europe? I am aware of this assertion too!
That's not what I said. And if you'd bothered to read the rest of the IPCC report your conspiracy people held up as an example. Perhaps you should just go read a few more paragraphs as I mentioned and find out what else it stated?
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
What do you think of this video?
Deming or whatever his name is from the 2006 hearing? The same guy that does work for petroleum companies and says carbon dioxide rises aren't caused by fossil fuels? Where he also said something to the effect that being gay is a choice and homosexual acts are wrong. I think he also said women's brains aren't built for technical work and doesn't mind they're paid less. Yeah, he seems like a great resource to reference.
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
I believe Michael Mann is responsible for the removal of the medieval warming period from the IPCC. The same Michael Mann who pushed heavily grossly over estimating models which we now know are completely wrong and the famous and now discredited "hockey stick". Maybe this link will interest you.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/09/14/ ... after-all/
Good lord. There is no removal of a "medieval warming period". Go back and read the report. It even supports some the limited data you've taken from it. If you have difficulty understanding mildly complex ideas, I'll make it really simple for you: Don't stand on the south pole and claim the Earth is an iceball. Stop making shit up that supports your viewpoint, then ignoring anything to the contrary.

Also, stop reading conspiracy websites. I opened this one, saw a few links on stuff like how "a shadow fell across Trump's inaurguration and that's why there wasn't as many people in the picture" (it was fucking raining, asshats) and closed it. I'm now scared Google is going to start showing me advertisements on chemtrails.
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
A bunch of other nonsense I didn't bother to peruse or even skim.
The references you give you either clearly don't understand or are conspiracy nonsense. You can't use a data source to support your claim, then claim it's fradulent when it doesn't. You've also taken out of context a tiny amount of data from a much, much larger set, framed it in a way that makes it support your view and ignored everything else. If you are interested, just about every science journal has done at least one dismissal of your MWP hypothesis. Go look up Newscientist, Scientific American, whatever.

My partner asked what I've been doing for past two nights. The resulting short conversation reminded me a lot of this https://www.xkcd.com/386/. If you don't want to listen to me, listen to your friend Asimov. Unless he of course has joined the ranks of formerly smart people of Asimov/Hawking/Tyson/Sagan/Cox/Dawkins/every other famous scientist I can think of.

It's 25kn and I'm going kiting.

User avatar
edt
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5539
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:27 am
Kiting since: 2010
Local Beach: Michigan
Gear: slingshot liquid force wainman pansh naish duotone cwb burton ronix rpm ozone
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 62 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby edt » Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:23 am

Being smart is like having a big shovel. Sure it lets you figure stuff out but when you are mistaken, all that being smart does for you is let you dig a deeper hole and be even more wrong.

fernmanus
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1402
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 5:53 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 22 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby fernmanus » Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:28 am

Toby, delete, delete it all. :rollgrin:

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2918
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 139 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby foilholio » Fri Nov 01, 2019 9:46 am

LoL
Blackened wrote:No. I'm mocking your inability to read
I think you mean "ability to read". Use of "in" does not seem necessary. For certain I can always improve!
Blackened wrote:That's not what I said.
Correct, but I think you implied it.
Blackened wrote: Where he also said something to the effect that being gay is a choice and homosexual acts are wrong
I am not sure what this has to do with the medieval warming period? Do you need to be in support of homosexuality to be able to do science? What level of support? Giving and receiving hand jobs? oral? fisting? Aids? I am kinda confused about at what point academia became obsessed with queerness. I am obviously aware of some of the queer communities contributions to science, Alan Turing for example, but the increasing obsession does seem a little weird. I kinda some how see campuses slowly turning into full time queer orgies.
Blackened wrote:There is no removal of a "medieval warming period".
It seems quite removed from the graphs. The people involved like Mann seem to have gone to great lengths to get it removed or maybe you are interpreting it as lessened.
Blackened wrote:Also, stop reading conspiracy websites.
It might actually shock but there are real conspiracies, there is history of them and evidence of them in action today. Look at climate gate. It is great to go at things with post modernist labeling but how exactly is one to discern a conspiracy website from a non conspiracy one, because some of the links I provided to you merely seem to disagree with your position? If disagreeing with your position makes something a conspiracy then we are so far apart we are not even using the same language. This makes having a discussion impossible, I suggest maybe you retreat to a "safe space".
Blackened wrote: If you are interested, just about every science journal has done at least one dismissal of your MWP hypothesis
What happened to consensuses and majority of scientists? When the majority doesn't suit you they are all wrong and when they do you push that, well the fake majority.
Blackened wrote: My partner asked what I've been doing for past two nights.
Well it's up to you if you want to reply.
Blackened wrote:Asimov/Hawking/Tyson/Sagan/Cox/Dawkins/
I actually read and listen to all these people. I am super interested in science. I even read and listen to Mann. I think you may be confused on my position. I believe in climate change, man made climate change. I even believe there is a risk from man made climate change. I however think the risk is absolutely tiny and the outcome will most likely be minor temperature wise but quite beneficial for the majority of life on the planet. I do think it would be wise even given the minor risk to limit our CO2 as quickly as possible, as playing roulette with our only planet is not wise. I don't think any political action will have any substantial effect on limiting CO2 production. I think new technologies will ultimately drive us economically to stop burning carbon. I predict that after we have stopped burning carbon, grown up, gotten over WW3, we will resume mining and burning carbon purely to raise the CO2 and so advert further ice ages but also increase the productivity and total mass of life on the planet, we will at that stage however be a multiplanet species of some quite high capability.

I do not see the divergence of fact based thinking and logic going on of particular in academia to be productive for society. It actually runs the risk of causing a civil war, conspiracy hat on that may be the intention.

If you wanted to do something to limit CO2 the actions being taken by the climate alarmists are not going to work. They are divisive, and you really need a unified action to actually do anything on it. I would suggest a singular push by all governments on one thing, batteries and improving them. But hey maybe I am not smart :-) ? A smart guy called Elon Musk seems to be going his own way there though!



Matteo V
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1435
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:42 pm
Kiting since: 2008
Local Beach: US, Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Utah/Oregon Coast
Favorite Beaches: Ft. Stevens, North coast of Oregon
Style: Just like school in summertime
Gear: Delta Kites and LF Kitefish QuadMod
Snowboard (Cambered and Rockered)
Foil kites on the snow
Brand Affiliation: NONE F--- the corporate world
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 86 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby Matteo V » Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:44 pm

foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
...In fact if you listen to Mann he is nuts.....
Mann is not "nuts". He is very much in the with majority of people in how we think.

People tend to form a belief, put faith in a concept or a particular reality (narrative), and then go all in on it. Any question of that reality is blasphemy. Mann exposes a peculiar property of this in that he is giving a perfect example:

'Since my reality and beliefs are true, and those realities and beliefs being true effect everything else, then everything else is a result of my reality.'


Religion is another ancient example of this. But the last 50 years in western society have provided many more examples. Being in prison could be blamed on the crime a person committed by one inmate, while another inmate guilty of the same crime, would blame being in prison on their race. Another person would look at the ratio of the sexes currently in college and say that society is moving to equality, while another would say it is biased in favor of one sex.

Humans developed this likely through it being advantageous to survival (evolution, and a base level exists in most animals). Given limited time to live and understand the world, quickly latching onto a belief and sticking with it no matter what, makes sense. The alternative is to deal with and live with the fact that humans don't have the answer. This is frightening and detrimental in most immediate survival situations. And this last part is also seemingly pre-programed into the human psyche in that "urgency" is often cited as a reason to NOT question a belief.

However, mixing this line of reasoning with the scientific method, is like mixing oil and water. But Mann is not crazy. The anomalous way humans think is to question, test hypothesis, verify AND offer other theories, and use repeatable results in order to get closer to the true reality. Those capable of that are very much in the minority and could be considered the anomalous ones. And with bit of human understanding, we can likely only get closer - but never achieve, a complete view of the physics involved in the most complicated processes. But by going down the route of stopping and forming a religiously defended personal reality, we stop the real science and make it impossible to get closer to the answer closest to the true reality.
These users thanked the author Matteo V for the post (total 2):
foilholio (Fri Nov 01, 2019 10:37 pm) • prop_joe (Sat Nov 02, 2019 3:10 pm)
Rating: 20%

grigorib
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1999
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 8:12 pm
Kiting since: 2009
Local Beach: OBX; Clinton Lake, IL; Lake Michigan; Tawas, MI; SPI; La Ventana
Gear: Kites: Slingshot Rally 5/7/9/11m, Slingshot Turbine 9m, Flysurfer Speed4 10m standard, Peter Lynn Venom II ARC 16m
Boards: Spleene RIP 37, Flysurfer Flydoor5 XL, Slingshot/Moses 80/91/105cm masts 590/683s wings, Tim's 36" "woody", Slingshot Micro 3'6", MBS Comp 95x

For sale: Slingshot SST 5m 2018 $400, Slingshot SST 6m 2018 $480, Slingshot SST 9m 2019 $625, Slingshot RPM 11m 2018 $600, Core XR4 10m $900, Core XR4 13.5m $980, Core XR4 17m $1075, Slingshot Turbine 5m 2017 like new $450, BROkite carbon board 140x44cm like new complete $650, Slingshot Rally 6m 2017 like new $530, 2019 Slingshot Guardian 17" brand new $260, 2018 Slingshot Guardian 20" bar $190
.
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby grigorib » Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:02 pm

Come on - let's start talking which kiting spots will disappear and debate where coast line would be in 20 years. if you expect tremendous sea level rising it's time to invest into lots and properties deeper in-shore.
These users thanked the author grigorib for the post:
Toby (Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:32 pm)
Rating: 10%

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2918
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 139 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Re: Reasons why Toby should delete Climate Change Threads

Postby foilholio » Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:22 pm

Matteo V wrote:
Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:44 pm
foilholio wrote:
Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:22 pm
...In fact if you listen to Mann he is nuts.....
Mann is not "nuts". He is very much in the with majority of people in how we think.

People tend to form a belief, put faith in a concept or a particular reality (narrative), and then go all in on it. Any question of that reality is blasphemy. Mann exposes a peculiar property of this in that he is giving a perfect example:

'Since my reality and beliefs are true, and those realities and beliefs being true effect everything else, then everything else is a result of my reality.'


Religion is another ancient example of this. But the last 50 years in western society have provided many more examples. Being in prison could be blamed on the crime a person committed by one inmate, while another inmate guilty of the same crime, would blame being in prison on their race. Another person would look at the ratio of the sexes currently in college and say that society is moving to equality, while another would say it is biased in favor of one sex.

Humans developed this likely through it being advantageous to survival (evolution, and a base level exists in most animals). Given limited time to live and understand the world, quickly latching onto a belief and sticking with it no matter what, makes sense. The alternative is to deal with and live with the fact that humans don't have the answer. This is frightening and detrimental in most immediate survival situations. And this last part is also seemingly pre-programed into the human psyche in that "urgency" is often cited as a reason to NOT question a belief.

However, mixing this line of reasoning with the scientific method, is like mixing oil and water. But Mann is not crazy. The anomalous way humans think is to question, test hypothesis, verify AND offer other theories, and use repeatable results in order to get closer to the true reality. Those capable of that are very much in the minority and could be considered the anomalous ones. And with bit of human understanding, we can likely only get closer - but never achieve, a complete view of the physics involved in the most complicated processes. But by going down the route of stopping and forming a religiously defended personal reality, we stop the real science and make it impossible to get closer to the answer closest to the true reality.
Wow Matteo that is a really good post. You sum up a lot of the psychology and mechanisms at play. I am actually half way through a lecture by Mann, a desire to unbias myself. He is sincere in his beliefs, in fact so sincere that I think he knows he is lying and making illogical statements. I am not so sure yet whether it is just purely for a fear of actually outcomes from global warming or some desire for specific social outcomes. There is clearly those in the Global Warming Cult that are only in it for the social aspect. You should see the face of the Professor ,who introduces Mann, light up when he mentioned "changing society". Academia clearly has more on it's agenda for us all than merely reducing carbon, if you have seen some of the more extreme left things going on, which sorry I must label as insane. How productive is methods employed to overplay the whole global warming thing I am not sure. I am actually quite left. I took the global warming predictions quite seriously, but as most will know this has been going on for a while. I think like many Al Gore had a huge influence on me, but as time went on predictions did not occur and I investigated more. Being bombarded by the MSM and general environment with logical inconsistencies continually I began to question more are more. My conclusion after much research is the social aspect is the real desire of the people behind this and the climate issue is merely the wedge to achieve it. The scary thing to me is the proposed social changes pushed by these people have the potential to stifle science and freedom and at the worst trigger a war or totalitarian governments in the west. Which given some of the revelations from Edward Snowden we were already well on our way a long time ago. Despite my dislike of Trump he has seemed to put some hiccup in the deep states machinery. They do seem to want him gone bad now, Syria was their darling project and he tipped the cake over. Little known fact is Pelosi was deeply involved in the little project to so undermine the foundations of America by gaining such invasive access to our lives that not even someone living with you could have that kind of access. But just look at some in the left working in the likes of Google and Facebook, this type of pervasive invasion of privacy is considered normal. The next step is no shit thought control, limiting what you can gain access through searches and other channels. Another little fact is some of Snowden's info has actually been know by some for at least 10-15 years before he revealed it. The internet has had some very capable people involved and well you can't search everything on it!

Now where is Miss Pullstrings with my tinfoil hat pic :-P


Return to “Kitesurfing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AlexL, Frozenfox, Google [Bot], Lou Wainman, MSN [Bot], zob and 13 guests

cron