Pelosi Elevates Climate Change On Day One

7 hours ago, Red said:

Then please show how children, even before they can talk, need to "admit ignorance" or they cannot learn - as mthebold claims it is a prerequisite for learning.  

Or, show that his attribution to Socrates is true - as I have never known of it and since his post spent many hours looking, only to confirm that it appears it was never made.

I have in other threads shown his claims to be nonsensical, and likely to be dishonest.  It's called pattern behaviour.  

If there is evidence to the contrary, I will gladly retract and apologise.

@mthebold 's Socrates image, even if inaccurate, can hardly be labeled nonsensical or dishonest. I'm sure there are many images of quotes out there in the Great WWW that have suspect origins. But I would not see a need to call someone out for using one in a internet forum. No need to be disruptive for the sake of being disruptive when we're just shooting the breeze about something as nonsensical as my Congressional candidacy. 

Let's save the banter for when we're arguing the merits of climate change or oil prices or something of that calibre. @Tom Kirkman

😁

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rodent said:

@mthebold 's Socrates image, even if inaccurate, can hardly be labeled nonsensical or dishonest. Are you saying that if it is not true, then it it not dishonest? What am I missing? Is the brave new word of false truths? I am sure  there are many images of quotes out there in the Great WWW that have suspect origins. So what? If they are not accurate, then why use them - humour aside. But I would not see a need to call someone out for using one in a internet forum. I would not bother, but pattern behaviour does not make for a good forum. No need to be disruptive for the sake of being disruptive , your opinion, and I am not much for "opinions", as I found no basis for the comments I reacted to, and you seem unable to defend them except by suggesting I am disruptive...when we're just shooting the breeze about something as nonsensical as my Congressional candidacy.  I say go for it....

I have no issue being called out when it's warranted - Jan has reprimanded me in the past.  

I am not really sure where you are going with what you regard as acceptable here.  Surely mthebold could show that I erred in countering his claim that we cannot learn unless we admit ignorance.  Was he confused when he said it, or is it just a belief - you know, of the Illurion kind?  I have to re-read some of mthebold's writing to make sense of it, and the only way I can is to occasionally acknowledge it was a fabrication.  I tend not to comment on stuff I am not interested in, so when I do, I am grateful for people pointing out if I make mistakes.  

Let's save the banter for when we're arguing the merits you mean, rather than the science? of climate change or oil prices or something of that calibre. @Tom Kirkman

 A very long time ago, before the USA overthrew Saddam, I was regularly banned from internet forums for asking how other members arrived at evidence that Iraq had WMD.  Some people don't like that idea so choose another avenue to defend what they do. I am inured.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rodent said:

@mthebold 's Socrates image, even if inaccurate, can hardly be labeled nonsensical or dishonest. I'm sure there are many images of quotes out there in the Great WWW that have suspect origins. But I would not see a need to call someone out for using one in a internet forum. No need to be disruptive for the sake of being disruptive when we're just shooting the breeze about something as nonsensical as my Congressional candidacy. 

Let's save the banter for when we're arguing the merits of climate change or oil prices or something of that calibre. @Tom Kirkman

😁

This forum has an Ignored Users function that any member can use to filter out shills and other persistent static.

> Settings > Account > Ignored Users

Just sayin.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Red said:

 

As luck would have it, being a jerk is acceptable here and not against community guidelines. What is not acceptable is harassing other members, so just watch how close you step to that line. 

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rodent said:

As luck would have it, being a jerk is acceptable here and not against community guidelines. What is not acceptable is harassing other members, so just watch how close you step to that line. 

I offered to retract my comments.  You offered censure.  You are dead right,  being a jerk is acceptable here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mthebold said:

The quote is derived from The Dialogues of Plato,...

So you cannot show it is true.   And you never addressed the other issue I raised. 

WRT to DKE you should revisit an earlier post of yours today and check what you said about aluminium, as whatever evidence you had would not be consistent with LME warehouse levels which have ranged above one million tons for most of the past year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

23 minutes ago, mthebold said:

Red, you are truly gifted in missing the point.

Given that the point was that those words were not spoken (see 21.d, P4) , and that your other claim was not consistent with pedagogy, the shoe appears to be on the other foot.

Edited by Red
Added the link to Plato's Apology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2019 at 8:40 AM, Rodent said:

The Rodent is displeased with your unpleasantness.

"DRILL BABY DRILL"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2019 at 8:09 PM, mthebold said:

The phrasing is likely imprecise, but the basic idea is correct: the first step to wisdom is recognizing one's ignorance. 

http://smbc-comics.com/comic/i-know-nothing

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2019 at 6:08 PM, Red said:

  On 1/5/2019 at 5:40 PM, TXPower said:

Socrates once said, “I need to have a shite”.  Can I prove it?  No.  What he needed to say and what he needed to do can be different.  What makes you believe he needed to tell people when he was going to go....?  But I know he said it, why, because he was a man.  I am a man and there are many things I do and never need to tell anyone about, so I do not find your idea compelling.  Now, I know this theory of mine fails rigorous fact finding prowess.  Even it did not, it failed a test of logic. And yet, it’s still true. This is what I am told by theists about what they believe, as well.

Are you sure ?

Nowadays, being a MAN  is supposedly a "relative" question depending on what you "perceive" you are...

As for the SHITE...

I do not know of anyone who has not said "I need to shite" in some form or another,  as when you have to go,  you don't just stop a conversation and walk away from someone,  you have to give them some indication of what is going on. 

Otherwise you would be rude...

What do you tell your boss, or co-workers when you have to leave your desk for a nature call ?

In conclusion,  TXPOWER is right.  No Doubt That Socrates Said It.

And everyone else too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The floated income tax increase is for people making 10 million U.S. dollars or more annually. Way above my pay grade. 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, Illurion said:

Are you sure ? Of what?

Nowadays, being a MAN  is supposedly a "relative" question depending on what you "perceive" you are...  So what - not relevant to this topic that I am aware.

As for the SHITE...

I do not know of anyone - and you know 7 billion people, right?  who has not said "I need to shite" in some form or another,  as when you have to go,  you don't just stop a conversation and walk away from someone,  you have to give them some indication of what is going on.   

Otherwise you would be rude..   

What do you tell your boss, or co-workers when you have to leave your desk for a nature call ?  Never had to ask permission. 

In conclusion,  TXPOWER is right.  No Doubt That Socrates Said It.  As usual, if you believe it then it is true.

And everyone else too.  No evidence.

 

Edited by Red
sp.
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 1/5/2019 at 2:28 PM, Red said:

Then please show how children, even before they can talk, need to "admit ignorance" or they cannot learn 

Ok,  i am game,  i will try to solve your riddle:

My answer:

CHILDREN,  EVEN BEFORE THEY CAN TALK,  ADMIT THEIR IGNORANCE,  BY "CRYING"

 

*  CHILDREN HAVE A NEED THAT THEY ARE IGNORANT OF BEING ABLE TO SOLVE,  SO THEY "CRY".

OR:

*  THEY ARE IGNORANT,  AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON AROUND THEM, SO THEY "CRY"

OR

*  THEY UNDERSTAND,  BUT CANNOT COMMUNICATE THEIR NEED,  SO THEY "CRY".

 

THEN,  WHEN THEY CRY,   THEY FIND THAT THE ADULTS AROUND THEM RESPOND TO THEM,  AND OFTEN RESOLVE THEIR NEEDS. 

*  AND THEY LEARN FROM THAT EXPERIENCE.

SO,  IN CONCLUSION,  I HEREBY SHOW YOU, RED,  THAT IT IS DEFINITELY THROUGH "CRYING" THAT CHILDREN "LEARN" HOW TO MANIPULATE ADULTS TO DO WHAT THE CHILDREN WANT DONE,  AND THEY DO THIS EVEN BEFORE THEY CAN TALK.....

 

There,  i have solved your puzzle.

Five Dollars Please.

I need the money as i am a poor refugee...9_9

Edited by Illurion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Illurion said:

CHILDREN,  EVEN BEFORE THEY CAN TALK,  ADMIT THEIR IGNORANCE,  BY "CRYING"

9_9

As usual, just your opinion and no evidence.  Crying is "instinctive" - I think even Tom would confirm that, that given psychology should have been covered in the sociology degree he reminds us about..

I would give you money to buy books, but you seem disinterested in things which do not fit your unique beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Red said:

As usual, just your opinion and no evidence.  Crying is "instinctive" - I think even Tom would confirm that, that given psychology should have been covered in the sociology degree he reminds us about..

I would give you money to buy books, but you seem disinterested in things which do not fit your unique beliefs.

Irrelevant.

It doesn't matter whether it is "instinctive" or not.

Nonetheless,  the "children" learn by doing it even before they can talk.

Five dollars please...  American USD...  none of that Australian stuff...

ps:  i love books,  my home library has a little over a thousand of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....that guy Rachel Maddow from msnbc thinks Trump wants to nationalize Petrobras. Beyond his comment, Alexandria Cortez Acasio noted:

"It's like....OMG...I mean, gas is a right not a privilege an so....like....gas an oil should be free for the 37 billion underprivileged peoples in the US'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Illurion said:

It doesn't matter whether it is "instinctive" or not.

Nonetheless,  the "children" learn by doing it even before they can talk.

Instinctive and learned are mutually exclusive concepts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We really need to address climate change and yes, "global warming". SHAME ON ALL YOU DENIERS! The science is clear, and when our planet runs out of oil and petroleum industrial potential, we need to get right on curing global warming along with poverty, war and hunger. 

At least the homeless won't be cold, 'cuz of global warming. See? There is always a silver lining....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2019 at 5:00 PM, Dan Warnick said:

Nah, we just love Rodent.  She drives a truck (with a gun rack), carries a gun, knows about oil and some would say she is beautiful.  Top it off with a moniker like Rodent, and that's all you need to know.  :) 

I didn't know anything about Rodent until reading this, and I now love her too!! 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2019 at 6:08 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

Please do.  I'll vote for you.  2019 politics will be a wild ride.

 

1c81055bb8bbefe8daf1926351327cb7937e45e49cdb1c7e9f0843615fcdcf34.jpeg

God help us all...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2019 at 10:00 PM, Dan Warnick said:

What are TIL and The Stig?

The STIG is Top Gears tamed racing driver that takes cars around the track to see how fast they really are. Michael Schumacher was one of them, they get new ones every once in a while......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bobby Cullari said:

We really need to address climate change and yes, "global warming". SHAME ON ALL YOU DENIERS! The science is clear, and when our planet runs out of oil and petroleum industrial potential, we need to get right on curing global warming along with poverty, war and hunger. 

At least the homeless won't be cold, 'cuz of global warming. See? There is always a silver lining....

This planet is many millions of years old,  and is always changing.

 

It is a natural process,  with much of the changes resulting from the planets relationship with the Sun.

 

Global Warming as defined by a "warming caused by humans" does not exist and there is NO VALID SCIENTIFIC evidence that says it does.

What documentation presented so far by various scientists and entities is fraudulent and based on falsified datasets.

 

Here in the USA,  both NOAA and NASA have had their datasets been shown to have been compromised, and corrupted.

Many of the people behind this organized fraud will eventually be imprisoned for their part in this.

 

But if you want to keep believing in it,  go ahead and do so.

 

But the heyday of "global warming" came and went,  and the treaties / money-shifting scams failed.

 

As for "when our planet runs out of oil" ?  9_9 

IF such an event could ever happen,  it will not be for many,  many,  centuries from now,  and would make an interesting new thread,   as there are theories that oil is continually being created deep below,  so that theoretically,  the planet will NEVER run out of oil.

 

Happy new year.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Illurion said:

This planet is many millions of years old,  and is always changing.  That has no relevance to the scientific sense of climate change.

It is a natural process,  with much of the changes resulting from the planets relationship with the Sun.  So please explain where millions of years ago humans were burning burning fossil fuels to generate electricity, make cement, or were otherwise generating GHGs.  OR, explain why the generational effects of irradiance on planetary temperature are subservient to GHGs, as is presently the case since decadal level insolation has been declining on average for over 40 years.

Global Warming as defined by a "warming caused by humans" does not exist and there is NO VALID SCIENTIFIC evidence that says it does.  That is sheer ignorance and denies what every major scientific organisation in the world attests to based on tens of thousands of peer reviewed science papers.

What documentation presented so far by various scientists and entities is fraudulent and based on falsified datasets.  This is what all conspiracy theorists say, yet are shown to be wrong time and again, and still repeat their lies.

Here in the USA,  both NOAA and NASA have had their datasets been shown to have been compromised, and corrupted. This is what all conspiracy theorists say, yet are shown to be wrong time and again, and still repeat their lies.

Many of the people behind this organized fraud will eventually be imprisoned for their part in this  This is what all conspiracy theorists say, yet are shown to be wrong time and again, and still repeat their lies.

But if you want to keep believing in it,  go ahead and do so.  

But the heyday of "global warming" came and went,  and the treaties / money-shifting scams failed.  There is no credible  science available that is able to show that the planet will be cooling for many decades, even if human GHG contributions fell to pre-industrial levels from today onwards - which is not going to happen.

As for "when our planet runs out of oil" ?  9_9 True - the rate of change of oil use is the salient factor affecting CO2 contributions.

IF such an event could ever happen,  it will not be for many,  many,  centuries from now,  and would make an interesting new thread,   as there are theories that oil is continually being created deep below,  so that theoretically,  the planet will NEVER run out of oil.  True, as there will be cheaper fungible sources of energy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bobby Cullari said:

We really need to address climate change and yes, "global warming". SHAME ON ALL YOU DENIERS! The science is clear, and when our planet runs out of oil and petroleum industrial potential, we need to get right on curing global warming along with poverty, war and hunger. 

At least the homeless won't be cold, 'cuz of global warming. See? There is always a silver lining....

Is it scary that I am unable to determine whether you are being serious or just joking?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites