Forums Outta Bounds I love carbon dioxide and support climate change.
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 30 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #573933
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    A very rational, educational and thorough video for those trying to detox from the Al Gore kool-aid:
    [vimeo:htovibzm]http://www.vimeo.com/8865909[/vimeo:htovibzm]

    #633378
    Zee
    136 Posts

    Just apply game theory… here it is in a nutshell.

    [youtube:3f52w166]zORv8wwiadQ[/youtube:3f52w166]

    #633379
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    Posting that video proves you didn’t watch the video and applying “game theory/4 boxes with smiley faces” doesn’t work when you don’t factor in faulty science and economic motives. It’s clever though.

    I have a hole in the sand I can rent for your head. PM me for details.

    I guess the author of my video is correct in assuming that MMGW advocates have taken the cue of Al Gore in refusing to debate and just blindly assume their cause is infallible. And tell me why does that guy in the video only refer to “climate change” and never even mention the word “global warming”?
    Zee, where have you gotten you information on global warming? Have you or anyone who doesn’t question the science ever even tried to look at an alternative scientific viewpoint objectively? (disclaimer: not once in this post did I say the earth hasn’t warmed up nor man doesn’t have an effect on warming in recent history. And not I’m not a republican or a member of any tea/coffee/yerba matte parties.)

    #633375
    Snurfer
    1448 Posts

    @BGnight wrote:

    (disclaimer: not once in this post did I say the earth hasn’t warmed up nor man doesn’t have an effect on warming in recent history. And not I’m not a republican or a member of any tea/coffee/yerba matte parties.)

    So I guess this means us kooks can disregard your post title as a fishing expedition and get back to our fiendish plot to stifle righteousness, freedom and manifest destiny 🙄

    Shark Snowsurf Chuna
    Voile V-Tail 170 BC
    Voile One Ninety Five
    Spark R&D Arc

    #633376
    Zee
    136 Posts

    @BGnight wrote:

    Posting that video proves you didn’t watch the video and applying “game theory/4 boxes with smiley faces” doesn’t work when you don’t factor in faulty science and economic motives. It’s clever though.

    I have a hole in the sand I can rent for your head. PM me for details.

    I guess the author of my video is correct in assuming that MMGW advocates have taken the cue of Al Gore in refusing to debate and just blindly assume their cause is infallible. And tell me why does that guy in the video only refer to “climate change” and never even mention the word “global warming”?
    Zee, where have you gotten you information on global warming? Have you or anyone who doesn’t question the science ever even tried to look at an alternative scientific viewpoint objectively? (disclaimer: not once in this post did I say the earth hasn’t warmed up nor man doesn’t have an effect on warming in recent history. And not I’m not a republican or a member of any tea/coffee/yerba matte parties.)

    Whatever dude…

    I’m here to talk about splitboarding.

    #633377
    lewmt
    570 Posts

    Really good presentation of factual refutation. The only problem with lengthy factual arguments is that they rarely trump emotionally charged ideology.

    #633374
    96avs01
    875 Posts

    So there is definitely substance to some of the arguments, but with any science one must always interpret the results in the appropriate context with the necessary caveats. This applies to both sides of the argument.

    It all boils down to the fact that one needs to become adequately informed to make a decision on the matter and shouldn’t be influenced by biased entities to form a personal opinion. Al Gore nor this guy are completely correct.

    Personally, I feel there is a definite need to better understand the feedback loops. But unfortunately, we should probably begin to take action before we have a truly quantitative understanding of these loops. If you have issues with CO2, then write your politicians to tell them to focus on lower hanging fruit such as black carbon and halocarbons that can be far easier addressed with less fiscal impact.

    165 Venture Divide/Spark Frankenburners/La Sportiva Spantiks
    163W Jones Solution/Phantom Alphas/Dynafit TLT5s
    162 Furberg

    Chris

    #633373
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    96, I agree with a lot of what you said. I’m not taking this guys POV as gospel. I’m just showing a very well thought out, educated viewpoint that can help wake people up to the true motives behind Cap and Trade type scams.

    The main point I’m trying to get across is the same point the author makes at the end of the video that the MMcatastrophicGW theory, with it’s questionable science and motives, has taken the steam out of all the real and proven environmental causes that we need to be addressing. People need to realize demonizing carbon dioxide is the same as demonizing water or oxygen. The fact the EPA has listed it as a pollutant should outrage people with it’s insanity.

    It’s become such an ingrained paradigm in so many people (mostly already left leaning, environmentally conscious people) that global warming (in the Al Gore doomsday scenario) is unfolding when it’s clear it’s not. In fact, these people get so defensive when you even hint at the science being wrong that they immediately dismiss you as a right winger or conspiracy whacko without even entertaining an alternative persepective.

    #633370
    Rico in AZ
    559 Posts

    BG, I’ve read most of your global warming conspiracy tirades, and the common thread through out seems to be that you disparage believer folks for their beliefs/opinions, and regard them as being fools/kool-aid drinkers/and whatever else. See here for todays example:

    I have a hole in the sand I can rent for your head. PM me for details.

    The same could be said of you; that you’ve drunk the denial kool-aid by the gallons. You could be disparaged too as a fool/kool-aid drinker/whatever for only seeing your side.

    Factual information never hurt anyone!

    Let’s all agree that the strength of your facts are only as strong as the source. It’s well documented by both sides of the debate, there are facts to support both sides.
    And lets all agree that both sides of the arguement have political/ideological/financial agendas, believers and deniers equally. Sometimes you seem to imply that only the MMGW believers are the only ones with an agenda, and as well, you imply that the deniers only bring the truth. Most certainly the deniers have their own agenda, as best exemplified by the fossil fuels industries.

    What irritates me is that you don’t seem to consider the believer’s side of the debate. A well informed opinion considers all sources of information.
    And thanks for your video, I will add that to my already massive steaming pile of information to form my ongoing opinion. And for the record I am on the fence in this whole debate.

    Your snowboarding speaks for itself. Let’s get back to the stoke.

    #633371
    96avs01
    875 Posts

    for those wishing to be notified of advancing climate science, both within peer-reviewed literature and popular press, you can sign up for a climate change listserv here

    however, beware it’s a lot of information to sift through…

    165 Venture Divide/Spark Frankenburners/La Sportiva Spantiks
    163W Jones Solution/Phantom Alphas/Dynafit TLT5s
    162 Furberg

    Chris

    #633372
    dude_reino
    467 Posts

    I think the point is moot. It really doesn’t matter if our grandchildren won’t have any snow to ride on in 50 years because at the rate this country is piling on debt, they will be impovershed and enslaved from birth to death. :nononno:

    #633368
    Zee
    136 Posts

    @dude_reino wrote:

    I think the point is moot. It really doesn’t matter if our grandchildren won’t have any snow to ride on in 50 years because at the rate this country is piling on debt, they will be impovershed and enslaved from birth to death. :nononno:

    On this note, when (not if) China (who holds most US debt) calls in the loan, what can we expect the reaction to be? I suspect it will be time to put the world largest military machine to use and erase said debt by force… Yes? No?

    China is not playing fair as an economic citizen of the world, they need to float their currency. Their refusal to do so makes their goods substantially cheaper than they should be. What baffles me is that we (Canada, US, Europe) continue to buy from them despite their unfair advantage.

    Put a 50% tariff on all Chinese goods, and watch stuff magically start being produced in North America/Europe again. Certain ‘capitalists’ will say that a tariff goes against the principles of a free market. To this I would argue that not letting your currency float is a larger violation of these principles.

    PS. Cap and Trade is a stupid idea, it will not reduce emissions, rather it will line the pockets of those that facilitate the transactions and produce little in the way of economic/environmental/social benefit… you know, the financial institutions that created the near economic collapse of 2008.

    #633369
    dude_reino
    467 Posts

    @Zee wrote:

    @dude_reino wrote:

    I think the point is moot. It really doesn’t matter if our grandchildren won’t have any snow to ride on in 50 years because at the rate this country is piling on debt, they will be impovershed and enslaved from birth to death. :nononno:

    On this note, when (not if) China (who holds most US debt) calls in the loan, what can we expect the reaction to be? I suspect it will be time to put the world largest military machine to use and erase said debt by force… Yes? No?

    Easy: sell California to them 😉

    @Zee wrote:

    China is not playing fair as an economic citizen of the world, they need to float their currency. Their refusal to do so makes their goods substantially cheaper than they should be. What baffles me is that we (Canada, US, Europe) continue to buy from them despite their unfair advantage.

    Put a 50% tariff on all Chinese goods, and watch stuff magically start being produced in North America/Europe again. Certain ‘capitalists’ will say that a tariff goes against the principles of a free market. To this I would argue that not letting your currency float is a larger violation of these principles.

    I have been labeled as a ‘capitalists whackjob’, but I’m all for a tariff. The words ‘imposts’ and ‘excises’ are printed right in the Constitution, so its a no-brainer. Even quick web searches for quotes by both Hamilton and Jefferson reveals that the founders heavily preferred duties instead of income taxes.

    #633367
    96avs01
    875 Posts

    @Zee wrote:

    PS. Cap and Trade is a stupid idea, it will not reduce emissions, rather it will line the pockets of those that facilitate the transactions and produce little in the way of economic/environmental/social benefit… you know, the financial institutions that created the near economic collapse of 2008.

    It also increases the likelihood that the emissions reduction don’t take place in areas where they should (populated areas) and occur in more rural settings. Thus you lose the potential public health benefits that will typically accompany emissions reductions when they occur within or upwind of populated locales.

    165 Venture Divide/Spark Frankenburners/La Sportiva Spantiks
    163W Jones Solution/Phantom Alphas/Dynafit TLT5s
    162 Furberg

    Chris

    #633380
    lewmt
    570 Posts

    Barrows wrote:

    The scientific community is almost universally agreed that the overall temperature is rising at an unprecedented rate (compared with known history)

    That is one of the key points of the video – the “consensus” is falling apart at an alarming rate. Another key point in the video – the data used to point towards the “hockey stick” graph was gathered from urban heat islands which obviously will skew the data. As far as glacial recession – what caused all the glaciers to recede to this point? When has the earth’s climate ever been static? When has there not been hurricanes, droughts, monsoons, floods, etc etc etc? Why is it ok to discard data in genuine “science” when the data doesn’t fit the model desired(East Anglia controversy)

    So then the problem honestly is pollution within urban heat islands. Fix those 1st. Also mentioned in a previously related thread is lower human population growth to reduce overall pollution and destruction of resources. This is a long term educational process which could work if masses were on board and came to the conclusion voluntarily without gov’t coercion. It is trending that way in industrial nations but a ramped up pace would be beneficial.

    Most importantly look at the legislative “solutions”. What do they fix? Who benefits? Who loses? Industry doesn’t lose they just pay more to gov’t if they exceed “quotas”. They also pay into a corrupt trading scheme that benefits who exactly? Consumers pay more for industry abuse. Consumers of all goods and services pay an enormous burden in increased taxation, which tends to hurt the poorest the most. Where is the solution in that? Why does anyone desire that the UN and its corrupt horde of bureaucrats taxing and regulatory authority over sovereign nations? Do you think it actually ends with the initial legislation?

    As to Zee’s video of “What if” There are so many ways to destruct that guys argument. My post is already gone long winded. Mainly – the hype that “the consensus is in” is only that – hype. It is a false argument used to diminish those that aren’t believers. If anyone can directly refute points made by the video – I’m more than happy to listen & learn.

    #633381
    dude_reino
    467 Posts

    I think that we can argue all day about whether it is natural or human-caused, but the bottom line is that it is happening. So instead of wasting time trying to figure out how to stop it, or how to reverse its effects, we should instead be focused on how to adapt to it.

    #633382
    Zee
    136 Posts

    There’s some good info here.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-Scientific-Guide-to-Global-Warming-Skepticism.html

    And really, that simplistic video I put up was trying to explain the complex ideas of game theory in layman’s terms as it relates to climate change.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

    #633383
    emerson
    4 Posts

    Game theory can’t really resolve climate change, rather it’s a predictor of how people will eventually behave. At best, it presents the threat in such a way as to encourage two sides of an issue to reach a compromise or face destruction. This is how it worked during the cold war where the four outcomes were: a. everybody gives up their nukes (yay!–never happened) b. Soviets “win” a nuclear war c. the US “wins” a nuclear war, and d. both sides pursue limitation treaties, test bans, and mutually assured destruction-oriented brinkmanship to try and make options b and c look less appealing. In the case of humanity versus planet, I don’t think the planet’s really all that scared of us, and will call our bluff.

    #633384
    Zee
    136 Posts

    Agreed, game theory is really about compromise…

    #633385
    PedroDelfuego
    758 Posts

    You guys have convinced me, I am ready to sign up now;
    http://www.sarahpac.com/
    What other crazy shit can I dispute… 9/11… JFK assassination… Ronald Reagan is not the antichrist… am I missing anything else???

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 30 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.