Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Greatest I am wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 5:49 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 4:28 pm
Greatest I am wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 3:02 pm

It rather strange that he would associate my political stripe with what I believe.

It does sound like he would ignore facts just because his political stripe is against it.

That is analogues to Christian who follow a genocidal son murdering God just because it is a Christian God, while ignoring the immorality of that God.

That kind of dead mindedness reminds me of a line in this link that indicates that many follow a God, regardless of the satanic morals of that God, just because they think he is on their side.

This is worth the watching.

https://vimeo.com/7038401

Regards
DL
It looks like a good film. They seem to be English actors.
Tbieter posted a good but ignored thread about the way everything today seems to be politicised, with 'facts' depending on what your political persuasion is. You see that on here all the time, with one example being the way in which the likes of bob and co. deny global warming just because it doesn't suit their political agenda. I find that really weird. Facts are facts and evidence is evidence. Those things don't give a damn about politics.
Indeed.

Be it idol worshiping Christians and Muslims, or Republicans or Democrats that idolize their political masters or party, all idol worshipers ignore logic and reason to maintain their tribal ties.

What a waste of good minds. They all deserve the adjective that this link ends with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjxZ6Mr ... re=related

Regards
DL
I love Richard Dawkins. May he live long and prosper for as long as his father did, or longer.
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by bobevenson »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 12:26 am
Greatest I am wrote: Sat May 20, 2017 8:21 pm
bobevenson wrote: Sat May 20, 2017 8:17 pm You're a left-wing, liberal Democrat, right?
Why do you ask? Because I am not a right wing climate change denier like Trump?

Regards
DL
Of course. Because EVERYTHING is about political agenda. Global warming doesn't sit with Boob's agenda, therefore it's not happening.
Can't refute Walter Williams' comments, huh?
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by bobevenson »

Ginkgo wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 11:29 am If Williams were a scientist he would know that past predictions having nothing to do with future predictions.
He knows that so-called "expert" predictions are often the mark of people who don't know shit from Shinola!
Impenitent
Posts: 4330
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by Impenitent »

I'm sure you could sell tickets to watch the flying fish jump out of the water to do their business...

-Imp
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

bobevenson wrote: Mon May 22, 2017 1:13 pm
Ginkgo wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 11:29 am If Williams were a scientist he would know that past predictions having nothing to do with future predictions.
He knows that so-called "expert" predictions are often the mark of people who don't know shit from Shinola!
Very selective 'reasoning'. Single out predictions that have been wrong in the past and take them as 'proof' that negates something that is glaringly obvious to every person on the planet except a few self-serving arseholes like bob, while selling out the entire human race and every other living thing that depends on the earth's temperate remaining within certain levels. Do you think you come across as normal bob? Are you shunned? The internet has made me see people in a different light. All those seemingly normal, smiling people are probably insane, fucked-in-the-head freakshows just under the surface. Also makes you look at the supposedly outwardly-weird ones in a different light too. Perhaps they are simply the ones who don't have a very good covering.
Last edited by vegetariantaxidermy on Tue May 23, 2017 11:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by Greta »

Greatest I am wrote: Fri May 19, 2017 10:39 pmLet us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.
Our neighbours, however, will not.

Have we forgotten the lesson of the Great Plague and the consequences of poor sanitation?
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by Ginkgo »

bobevenson wrote: Mon May 22, 2017 1:13 pm
Ginkgo wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 11:29 am If Williams were a scientist he would know that past predictions having nothing to do with future predictions.
He knows that so-called "expert" predictions are often the mark of people who don't know shit from Shinola!
That may well be the case but Williams erroneously believes that past predictions will resemble future predictions. In other words, wrong predictions in the past mean wrong predictions in the future. His reasoning is fallacious.
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by bobevenson »

Ginkgo wrote: Tue May 23, 2017 11:02 am
bobevenson wrote: Mon May 22, 2017 1:13 pm
Ginkgo wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 11:29 am If Williams were a scientist he would know that past predictions having nothing to do with future predictions.
He knows that so-called "expert" predictions are often the mark of people who don't know shit from Shinola!
That may well be the case but Williams erroneously believes that past predictions will resemble future predictions. In other words, wrong predictions in the past mean wrong predictions in the future. His reasoning is fallacious.
His reasoning in not fallacious. He is merely pointing out the tendency of left-wing liberal socialists to be incredibly wrong regarding predictions.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

bobevenson wrote: Tue May 23, 2017 1:03 pm
Ginkgo wrote: Tue May 23, 2017 11:02 am
bobevenson wrote: Mon May 22, 2017 1:13 pm
He knows that so-called "expert" predictions are often the mark of people who don't know shit from Shinola!
That may well be the case but Williams erroneously believes that past predictions will resemble future predictions. In other words, wrong predictions in the past mean wrong predictions in the future. His reasoning is fallacious.
His reasoning in not fallacious. He is merely pointing out the tendency of left-wing liberal socialists to be incredibly wrong regarding predictions.
Oh wow. You've just about covered every moronic yank misnomer in one fell swoop here (you missed 'commie' though).
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by bobevenson »

No, I'm talking about Europeans in general and limeys in particular.
Ginkgo
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by Ginkgo »

bobevenson wrote: Tue May 23, 2017 1:03 pm
Ginkgo wrote: Tue May 23, 2017 11:02 am
bobevenson wrote: Mon May 22, 2017 1:13 pm
He knows that so-called "expert" predictions are often the mark of people who don't know shit from Shinola!
That may well be the case but Williams erroneously believes that past predictions will resemble future predictions. In other words, wrong predictions in the past mean wrong predictions in the future. His reasoning is fallacious.
His reasoning in not fallacious. He is merely pointing out the tendency of left-wing liberal socialists to be incredibly wrong regarding predictions.
It is fallacious reasoning on the part of Williams. He is article is based on pointing out wrong predictions in the past. This does not exclude the possibility that predictions will be accurate in the future, left-wing or otherwise.
Londoner
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:47 am

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by Londoner »

bobevenson wrote: Sat May 20, 2017 9:05 pm In 2000, climate researcher David Viner told The Independent, a British newspaper, that within "a few years," snowfall would become "a very rare and exciting event" in Britain. "Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said. "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past." In the following years, the U.K. saw some of its largest snowfalls and lowest temperatures since records started being kept in 1914.
It is the quotation marks that are misleading. Some of the quotes are directly from the scientist, but others are quotations from the newspaper report. So, for example, Viner never said "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past", that is the headline writer. What he actually said is "snow is starting to disappear from our lives”. He also said that meanwhile we could expect episodes of heavy snowfalls, but this was left out of the report.

Snow, of course, does not require particularly low temperatures, so predictions about the frequency of snow (as distinct from rain) in the UK are not related to temperature but to the seasonal pattern of precipitation. The suggestion is that the UK will get both its rain (and snow) less frequently but in more intense storms - since the conditions that result in snow have to be just right, neither too cold or too warm, that makes snow less likely.

Obviously this is far too boring a message for the journalist. And on the internet you have page after page recycling the same misleading precis quoted above. (If you have the energy you could do the same with all the other claims in the article.)

But what I find shocking is that a serious academic, a professor of economics would write an article so one-sided. You expect that sort of thing from journalists or politicians, but even when writing to a non-academic audience you would think that the habit of checking your quotes would be so ingrained that as an academic you could not bring yourself use stuff lifted unchecked straight from the internet - does he allow his students to do that?

Perhaps it is just further evidence that nowadays whenever an issue is seen as 'political' we have learnt that this gives everyone involved license to 'bullshit'. (So this post could also be a contribution to the thread in 'Applied Ethics' titled 'when lying is the right thing to do'.)
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by bobevenson »

Sorry, you're just nitpicking and not considering the totality of what Williams is saying, which is 100% correct!
Londoner
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:47 am

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by Londoner »

bobevenson wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 1:36 pm Sorry, you're just nitpicking and not considering the totality of what Williams is saying, which is 100% correct!
It serves as an example - if Williams didn't bother to research that claim, why would we assume he has taken the trouble over anything else?

I only picked that one out because it concerned the UK. Let's take the next paragraph:

In 1970, ecologist Kenneth Watt told a Swarthmore College audience: "The world has been chilling sharply for about 20 years. If present trends continue, the world will be about 4 degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990 but 11 degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age."

Watts may have said this, but since he is a zoologist he would have been speaking outside any area of his expertise, and speaking against the consensus view of climate scientists at the time. As usual, the same quote is repeated again and again on the internet; we never see any context or details.

(Professor Williams is an economist. Suppose I dig up a quote from 50 years ago, by a non-economist, that makes a false economic prediction - does that prove whatever Professor Williams says now must be 'deception and lies'?)

Once again, we understand that advertising agencies and spin doctors will do this sort of thing. But once upon a time an academic would not stoop so low.
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

Post by bobevenson »

Londoner wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 4:27 pm
bobevenson wrote: Wed May 24, 2017 1:36 pm Sorry, you're just nitpicking and not considering the totality of what Williams is saying, which is 100% correct!
It serves as an example - if Williams didn't bother to research that claim, why would we assume he has taken the trouble over anything else.
If you think he made a mistake on one example, which is certainly unproven and based only on your comment, why do you automatically assume everything he said is probably a mistake. That's prejudicial thinking at best.
Post Reply