Robyn Malcolm should go back to being a bad actor

[rainman]

yes that is my argument

Well, Jimmy me lad, not sure how to put this without offending you, so... I'll just have to take that chance. I'm usually more than happy to argue the (pop) science of climate change, but in order to do this we would have to depart from an approximately congruent starting point, that being a level of general knowledge and intelligence somewhat above... well, the amoebic. Your opening bid for an argument is so brain-stoppingly idiotic that, well, I'm flatly astounded. To be honest I just don't think you possess the basic logic required to have an intelligent discussion. Having dropped your initial clanger, how could I ever think that anything else you might concoct might be worth considering?

As a result I very much doubt I could ever persuade you of the truth or falsehood of the subject of climate change, and likewise doubt you could persuade me of your views. Both of which seem to me as requirements for a reasonable debate. So, my apologies, but I must decline to engage further. It would be like arguing the politics of global development with my cat.

You may see this as victory if that makes you feel better (but I'm afraid it isn't).

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." A Einstein.
(How many times do I have to learn this lesson???)

I'm sick of going places and have an old hippy show me half a herald article saying the Iceburgs melting, thus proving CO2 causes climate change.

Well, inconvenienly for you it does, and we have known this since the 1800s. Try to keep up. Perhaps start by googling Fourier, Tyndall, Ångström, Arrhenius and Högbom (and yes, Milankovich, too). Or just about any related science in the century since.

Keisha in particular is very young and unlikely to know much detail.

I suspect our Keisha is younger than Jimmy and Jonno above, and clearly she has waaaaay more of a clue than they do. Combined, even.

[JimO]

[QUOTE=rainman;1129730264










I suspect our Keisha is younger than Jimmy and Jonno above, and clearly she has waaaaay more of a clue than they do. Combined, even.[/QUOTE]

you were doing alright until the above sentance

[Manxman]

Robyn Malcolm and Keisha Sandcastle-Hues are actors. They're peddling their celebrity for a cause that they presumably believe in. Other than that, they are not experts on climate change. Their opinions have no more relevance than yours or mine. However our media are so gullible that they will pander to celebrities pimping a cause du jour, rather than doing any real investigation of the issues or taking seriously the views of experts who actually know something about the issue at question.

I wait with breathless anticipation for the day when the media starts asking some probing questions about the activities of multinational NGOs like Greenpeace, or specifically Greenpeace. I don't care which.

Started reading this thread, but quickly found this was as far as I needed to go.

Well put that man...

[cowpoos]

Well, Jimmy me lad, not sure how to put this without offending you, so... I'll just have to take that chance. I'm usually more than happy to argue the (pop) science of climate change, but in order to do this we would have to depart from an approximately congruent starting point, that being a level of general knowledge and intelligence somewhat above... well, the amoebic. Your opening bid for an argument is so brain-stoppingly idiotic that, well, I'm flatly astounded. To be honest I just don't think you possess the basic logic required to have an intelligent discussion. Having dropped your initial clanger, how could I ever think that anything else you might concoct might be worth considering?

As a result I very much doubt I could ever persuade you of the truth or falsehood of the subject of climate change, and likewise doubt you could persuade me of your views. Both of which seem to me as requirements for a reasonable debate. So, my apologies, but I must decline to engage further. It would be like arguing the politics of global development with my cat.

You may see this as victory if that makes you feel better (but I'm afraid it isn't).

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." A Einstein.
(How many times do I have to learn this lesson???)

¿¿əʞıl noʎ ɟı spɹoʍ ɥʇıʍ əƃɐʇuəɹɐd ɹnoʎ ʞɔɐʇʇɐ puɐ səɯɐu noʎ llɐɔ uəʌə˙˙noʎ ɥʇıʍ əʇɐqəp ʎlıddɐɥ llıʍ ı˙˙˙pɐəɹɥʇ ʍəu ɐ ʇɹɐʇs əsɐəld ˙ƃuıɯɹɐʍ lɐqloɹƃ əpɐɯ uɐɯ ɹoɟ əsɐɔ ɹnoʎ əʇɐʇs əsɐəld˙˙˙ɥo ¿¿ʇɥƃıɹ ʇuəɯnƃɹɐ ɹnoʎ əʞɐɯ ʇɐɥʇ səop səɯɐu ɯıɥ ƃuıllɐɔ əlɔıʇɹɐ əloɥʍ ɐ ƃuıpuəds ʎq ʇɐɥʇ 'ʇı sı ʍoɥ˙˙˙ʎɐʞo ¿¿¿¿ʇɐɥʍ ɹo ʇɹɐɯs əɹɐ noʎ ʞuıɥʇ noʎ op poƃ ʎɯ ɥo

[oldrider]

¿¿əʞıl noʎ ɟı spɹoʍ ɥʇıʍ əƃɐʇuəɹɐd ɹnoʎ ʞɔɐʇʇɐ puɐ səɯɐu noʎ llɐɔ uəʌə˙˙noʎ ɥʇıʍ əʇɐqəp ʎlıddɐɥ llıʍ ı˙˙˙pɐəɹɥʇ ʍəu ɐ ʇɹɐʇs əsɐəld ˙ƃuıɯɹɐʍ lɐqloɹƃ əpɐɯ uɐɯ ɹoɟ əsɐɔ ɹnoʎ əʇɐʇs əsɐəld˙˙˙ɥo ¿¿ʇɥƃıɹ ʇuəɯnƃɹɐ ɹnoʎ əʞɐɯ ʇɐɥʇ səop səɯɐu ɯıɥ ƃuıllɐɔ əlɔıʇɹɐ əloɥʍ ɐ ƃuıpuəds ʎq ʇɐɥʇ 'ʇı sı ʍoɥ˙˙˙ʎɐʞo ¿¿¿¿ʇɐɥʍ ɹo ʇɹɐɯs əɹɐ noʎ ʞuıɥʇ noʎ op poƃ ʎɯ ɥo

I am too old to stand on my head long enough to read this backwards, how the fuck did you do that?

[bogan]

I am too old to stand on my head long enough to read this backwards, how the fuck did you do that?

and the quote even upside down italic'd it, thats pretty cool wouldn't you say ¿

also, it aint that hard to read it upside down, just use a mirror!

[cowpoos]

I am too old to stand on my head long enough to read this backwards, how the fuck did you do that?

I was trying to see how smart rainman was...not that I take by the eerie silence from him.

[cowpoos]

, just use a mirror!

and turn your laptop upside down.

[rainman]

I was trying to see how smart rainman was...not that I take by the eerie silence from him.

Sorry, real life intervened. You know how it goes, whales to save, yoghurt to eat, sandals to wear... And, sorry to disappoint, but I can read upside down. Can't see the point, though.

As to your points, well...
1. Yes I am relatively smart (and indeed often too much of a smartarse for my own good)
2. I don't think I called JimO names (Ok maybe I made a tart comment about amoebas, but that's all, and it was clearly exaggeration), and I certainly didn't insult his parentage.
3. I did (correctly I think) suggest that the logic in his theory of the non-existence of anthro. climate change was, um, poor. I mean, really, superficially similar events can't have different causes? C'mon. I even gave him a chance to think about it before sticking his neck out.

People with really poorly thought out positions can do with a bit of a prod from time to time. What else is a sane person to do?

[MisterD]

People with really poorly thought out positions can do with a bit of a prod from time to time. What else is a sane person to do?

Ah-ha, back to celebrity eco-idiots...campaigning at Punakaiki against a possible mine 50km away? How many mines are there already within that radius?

[rainman]

Ah-ha, back to celebrity eco-idiots...campaigning at Punakaiki against a possible mine 50km away? How many mines are there already within that radius?

Dunno. How many? And how many are on S4 land?

[JimO]

People with really poorly thought out positions can do with a bit of a prod from time to time. What else is a sane person to do?

i dont know how about we ask Keisha Sandcastle Hughes

[cowpoos]

3. I did (correctly I think) suggest that the logic in his theory of the non-existence of anthro. climate change was, um, poor. I mean, really, superficially similar events can't have different causes? C'mon. I even gave him a chance to think about it before sticking his neck out.

No...No you did not....you didn't not produce any evidence to contrary.

And the argument you have just used, is that a similar event can't have different effects is very true...but they equally could have the same. Null argument... because all that you have done is state coulds and hows and ifs...No facts [proper peer review facts...not baseless IPCC propagandize half truths]

A war with words, will only win a war for so long. Lets have some facts Please!!!!

[cowpoos]

Keisha Sandcastle Hughes

Hmmm....just because she has a voice...does not mean she should use it.

[rainman]

No...No you did not....you didn't not produce any evidence to contrary.

And the argument you have just used, is that a similar event can't have different effects is very true...but they equally could have the same. Null argument...

My discussion with JimO was not about evidence and facts, but logic. His assertion (present climate change cannot be caused by mankind's recent combustion of fossil fuels, because prior climate change happened, and there was not associated fossil fuel combustion then) is a syllogistic fallacy, aka logical crap. It's like saying "my toe can't be hurting because I stubbed it on the chair, as last time it hurt it was because I dropped a hammer on it". There's no point arguing anything with someone who thinks like that, because the logical error is so blatant any argument would be tedious and likely unproductive. It's like a language gap - think of Basil Fawlty talking to Manuel, who lacks the (language, in that case) capacity to understand Basil's instructions. Prety quickly there's shouting and people being hit on the head. No fun for anyone.

If you think my response to JimO's original point is a "null argument" you have failed to understand the assertion made by JimO in the first place, and the fallacy implicit in it. If you want facts, consider that I did stub my toe the other day, and I have dropped a hammer on it in the past. Both hurt. Therefore, JimO's argument is invalid.

In case you get all grumpy about me being so "rude" please understand I'm not questioning your value as a human being or your other capabilities - I have no doubt that there are many things you both can do far better than me. But you're not thinking clearly on this issue.

Then again, most of the rest of this thread seems to be saying that celebrities must be wrong about "technical" topics because they are only celebrities, so maybe I am expecting too much here.