Peak Gas In China
09-01-2023 | 08:46 AM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,286
Likes: 18
09-01-2023 | 08:48 AM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Who is saying "everything should be free"?
And you are really stuck on greed being a bad thing.
Yep, oil companies are barely staying alive: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/...evels-in-2022/
And you are really stuck on greed being a bad thing.
Yep, oil companies are barely staying alive: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/...evels-in-2022/
I can call someone ignorant and while technically the word should be unoffensive, that's not how the "ignorant" perceive it.
So, you can try to say....no offense is meant/inferred/construed by using the word "GREED".... but one would be ignorant to not understand that 99.9% of people take the word greed as an put down/ insult.
"And who is saying everything should be free?" Well, technically "everything" wasn't mentioned, but earlier I proffered 5 or 6 large ticket items that would be good for a society to have but asked "How do you pay for it in perpetuity?" The consensus of 5-6 individuals turned to question around in an attempt to infer anybody who doesn't want those things for everybody is greedy, heartless and doesn't care about their fellow man. I fully support socialism until I try to figure out how to pay for it. I know, let's take a poll and ask the common man, "Do you want free xxx?" Invariably it will have overwhelming support. That support is directly related to whether it is free for them, or whether they are going to foot the bill for the others free stuff. I applaud you on catching me on the technicality of "everything"....but I feel the "big picture" of my point is still in tact.
09-01-2023 | 09:09 AM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 34
Got me thinking about a humorous analogy from decades prior....
https://www.widgetcpa.com/wp-content...ed-in-Beer.pdf
https://www.widgetcpa.com/wp-content...ed-in-Beer.pdf
09-01-2023 | 09:09 AM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 358
that unfortunately, might just be the case
majority of climatologists say that the earth is not able to process this much carbon.
we just had the hottest summer ever recorded.
we are currently having some of the hottest sea temperatures ever recorded. (Florida buoy recorded 101 degrees)
if it looks like a duck, and acts like a duck, im going to treat it like a duck until proven otherwise.
id rather try and land this thing safely with a false fire light, then regret it 30 minutes into the flight when its too late.
signed again: someone who hates both parties, tries to find the middle ground, and doesnt want to crush our economy. Politics ruin everything
majority of climatologists say that the earth is not able to process this much carbon.
we just had the hottest summer ever recorded.
we are currently having some of the hottest sea temperatures ever recorded. (Florida buoy recorded 101 degrees)
if it looks like a duck, and acts like a duck, im going to treat it like a duck until proven otherwise.
id rather try and land this thing safely with a false fire light, then regret it 30 minutes into the flight when its too late.
signed again: someone who hates both parties, tries to find the middle ground, and doesnt want to crush our economy. Politics ruin everything
09-01-2023 | 09:11 AM
#96
Always Working
Joined: Jul 2021
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
from today's headlines.............
(Bloomberg) -- Outgoing Stanford University President Marc Tessier-Lavigne retracted two papers from the journal Science Thursday, just as the former high-flying neuroscientist steps down from his post after questions arose about his earlier research.
The flawed brain studies were published in February and March of 2001, when Tessier-Lavigne was a rising star at the University of California, San Francisco. They’ve been cited hundreds of times by other scientists since then, a sign of acceptance as important scholarship. They’re among five he pledged to retract or correct when an investigation initiated by the university’s board released its findings in July.
Spurred by a series of articles in the Stanford Daily student newspaper, the board scrutinized a wide swath of research that Tessier-Lavigne oversaw, including one study published when he was a top research executive at Genentech Inc., just before the biotech was fully purchased by Roche Holding AG in 2009. While the review found evidence of “manipulation of research data” by other authors in some of the studies reviewed, there was no evidence he had falsified results.
In brief retraction notices for the two Science papers, Tessier-Lavigne said that in 2015 he proposed corrections to each that weren’t published “because of an error on the part of the journal.” However, after the review found evidence of manipulated data, he decided to retract them, the notices said."
Maybe this, ^^^^^^^ and Fauci living in a theoretical utopian glass bubble leads people to at least question the accepted experts opinions?
(Bloomberg) -- Outgoing Stanford University President Marc Tessier-Lavigne retracted two papers from the journal Science Thursday, just as the former high-flying neuroscientist steps down from his post after questions arose about his earlier research.
The flawed brain studies were published in February and March of 2001, when Tessier-Lavigne was a rising star at the University of California, San Francisco. They’ve been cited hundreds of times by other scientists since then, a sign of acceptance as important scholarship. They’re among five he pledged to retract or correct when an investigation initiated by the university’s board released its findings in July.
Spurred by a series of articles in the Stanford Daily student newspaper, the board scrutinized a wide swath of research that Tessier-Lavigne oversaw, including one study published when he was a top research executive at Genentech Inc., just before the biotech was fully purchased by Roche Holding AG in 2009. While the review found evidence of “manipulation of research data” by other authors in some of the studies reviewed, there was no evidence he had falsified results.
In brief retraction notices for the two Science papers, Tessier-Lavigne said that in 2015 he proposed corrections to each that weren’t published “because of an error on the part of the journal.” However, after the review found evidence of manipulated data, he decided to retract them, the notices said."
Maybe this, ^^^^^^^ and Fauci living in a theoretical utopian glass bubble leads people to at least question the accepted experts opinions?
This is EXACTLY why peer review is an important part of science. Just because some other scientists cite it doesn't qualify for peer review. PEER review also isn't some pilot reviewing their work, just so you know (just like you reviewing Fauci's work).
09-01-2023 | 09:15 AM
#97
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,286
Likes: 18
09-01-2023 | 09:19 AM
#98
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 979
Likes: 78
09-01-2023 | 09:24 AM
#99
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 0
This is the exact issue I pointed out with Covid, i.e. the lock downs, masks, vaccines, etc, were only dealing with 1-2% of the transmission vector. Yet the damage from these insignificant measures was massive.
09-01-2023 | 09:36 AM
#100
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 358
Those are not equivalent, climate change is multifaceted problem, stopping greenhouse gases only delays the process an insignificant amount of time. The real issue is human activity.
This is the exact issue I pointed out with Covid, i.e. the lock downs, masks, vaccines, etc, were only dealing with 1-2% of the transmission vector. Yet the damage from these insignificant measures was massive.
This is the exact issue I pointed out with Covid, i.e. the lock downs, masks, vaccines, etc, were only dealing with 1-2% of the transmission vector. Yet the damage from these insignificant measures was massive.
your example is the very problem we have of polarization of critical thinking. Should everyone have gotten the vaccine? Hell no. Should old/fat/sick people have gotten it? The objective statistical data says hell yes (unless you’re sonic and believe in massive conspiracies where 1000s of greedy humans move lockstep with each other with not one person willing to flip for a million dollars)
same is applied to climate change……there is a middle ground. Where are the adulttssss in the rooooommmmm?????
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
