Is magic related to electro-magnetism?

[Age]

Simply stating it doesn't make it true.

It is well known to archaeologists that climate has changed many times, and was much warmer in Neolithic times than it is now, for example.

Well, there is the decades of scientific research which says that human-caused climate change is happening now.

Scientists often find what their funders and employers want.

VERY, VERY GOOD POINT.

But thinking or BELIEVING that the climate was FIXED at ANY time, and that the climate was NOT in a continual state of CHANGE ALL of the time, is ALSO A GOOD POINT to POINT OUT that the climate is ALWAYS CHANGING, along with the POINT that OF COURSE human beings have an INFLUENCE on THIS CONSTANT STATE of CHANGE. It would be BETTER if this OBVIOUS Fact was NEVER in DISPUTE, along with there being a MUCH BETTER OUTCOME if 'we' just LOOKED AT what TYPE of CHANGE and AT HOW MUCH ACTUAL CHANGE human beings GREEDY and SELFISH behavior is HAVING on the CLIMATE, ITSELF.

Then, and ONLY THEN, 'we' could START LOOKING AT what 'we' ACTUALLY NEED TO DO. That is; IF 'we' REALLY DO want to KEEP SURVIVING, and KEEP LIVING on planet EARTH, as IT was PREVIOUSLY, or ONCE WAS-LIKE.

But, 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, seem to PREFER to just ARGUE and FIGHT OVER WHETHER 'you' ARE causing the climate to change or whether 'you' ARE NOT. WITHOUT ACTUALLY DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THE ACTUAL DEGREE and DIRECTION OF CLIMATE CHANGE, which is, FOR SURELY, OBVIOUSLY HAPPENING and OCCURRING BEFORE 'YOUR VERY OWN EYES', as some would say.

And, the STUPIDITY, the RIDICULOUSNESS, the ABSURDITY, and the NONSENSICALNESS of this FIGHTING and ARGUING is OBVIOUS, and ALSO SPEAKS for ITSELF. Well to ME, ANYWAY.

But, AGAIN, 'you' are ALL absolutely FREE to carry on ANYWAY that WANT TO.

[Age]

Well, there is the decades of scientific research which says that human-caused climate change is happening now.

Scientists often find what their funders and employers want.

I'm amazed at the anti-intellectual and anti-scientific attitudes in these forums.

I am NOT SURPRISED that SOME people SEE 'things' that are NOT REALLY THERE.

EXPRESSING an IRREFUTABLE Truth does NOT mean that one EXPRESSING that Truth AUTOMATICALLY becomes a so-called "anti-intellectual" and/or an "anti-scientist" with these 'anti-attitudes'. But, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is some people REALLY are BLIND to what thee ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY. And, what WILL BE found is DUE to their CURRENTLY HELD BELIEF.

The work of thousands of intelligent, thoughtful, ethical, educated people simply dismissed with the wave of a hand.

I am NOT AMAZED that SOME people TURN, what was ACTUALLY SAID and STATED, AROUND to some completely OTHER THING.

If it is NOT BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that SOME 'things' are so-called "found", which the "funders" of and/or the "employers" of WANTED 'to be found', then it would be MUCH BETTER if this COMMONLY KNOWN KNOWLEDGE became FAR MORE COMMON.

Oh, and by the way, NOT just are 'things' so-called "found" when what was "found" was being PAID TO BE "found" nor "finding" 'it' was part of being and/or remaining EMPLOYED by that 'employer', but ALSO some people "find" 'things' just BECAUSE of the BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS within 'them' as well as because of the BELIEF or FAITH that 'they' HAVE IN "others" or 'other writings'.

This can be CLEARLY SEEN among the so-called "religious" community AND EQUALLY among the so-called "scientific" community.

Some so-called "scientists" claim to "find" 'things', which were PREDICTED to occur, by 'those' who those "scientists" have BELIEF or FAITH IN.

AND, this HAPPENS FAR MORE than 'you', people, realized YET, back in the days when this was being written.

[Age]

Well, there is the decades of scientific research which says that human-caused climate change is happening now.

Scientists often find what their funders and employers want.

Of course, here the crucial factor is time. It is still some years off in the future before, one way or another, one side or the other will be proven right.

What does ANY one here think, there is to be PROVEN right or wrong?

OF COURSE human beings cause the climate to change. This is an ALREADY PROVED Fact. But, in what DEGREE and DIRECTION and by how much though, just needs to be WORKED OUT, FIRST.

But, what I would suggest is that INSTEAD of being concerned about climate change, itself, especially considering the fact that human beings are a VERY ADAPTABLE species, and probably the ONLY species that can ADAPT TO, and DO LIVE very easily with, changes of temperatures of MORE than 100 degree celscius that they FOCUS ON REDUCING the ACTUAL POLLUTION and POISONS that they keep producing.

Human beings, and OTHER animals, CAN LIVE, and have lived, with temperature changes, decreasing AND increasing. As history PROVES True. But NO thing can live within increasing amounts of pollution and/nor poisons. And, human beings only create and cause pollution and poison because of they GREEDY and SELFISH behaviors and ways, which, by the way, is what is leading to an exponential amount of temperature changes, or in other words 'climate change'.

And until coastal cities start disappearing under water and the severity of weather events -- storms and droughts and floods -- explodes off the charts, both sides can still insist the other side is wrong.

Why not until inland cities start disappearing under water, razed with fires, and/or emptied by droughts?

And while some scientists do in fact find what their "funders and employers want" that's precisely the point say those on the left. That's exactly how capitalism works. It's almost always the bottom line "here and now" rather than the consequences of that "there and then".

Though surely none of this has much to do with magic and electro-magnetism.

Imagine, however, if the Earth was now into the next Ice Age. Wouldn't almost everyone be clamoring to burn all the fossil fuels we could get our hands on? Anything to warm the planet up?

WHY have human beings 'evolved' to SEEK OUT what provides them with what they, individually or collectively, WANT and DESIRE, for example, if one's optimal temperature ranges is between 22 degree celsius and 23 degree celsius, then they will attempt to obtain that temperature 'around them' no matter of the consequences for the REST of ANY or EVERY thing else? And, WHY did they evolve to SEEK OUT these 'things', instead of JUST LIVING WITH the way things ARE, as they USED to ONCE, VERY HAPPILY, LIVE WITH?

[Age]

Scientists often find what their funders and employers want.

Of course, here the crucial factor is time. It is still some years off in the future before, one way or another, one side or the other will be proven right. And until coastal cities start disappearing under water and the severity of weather events -- storms and droughts and floods -- explodes off the charts, both sides can still insist the other side is wrong.

And while some scientists do in fact find what their "funders and employers want" that's precisely the point say those on the left. That's exactly how capitalism works. It's almost always the bottom line "here and now" rather than the consequences of that "there and then".

Though surely none of this has much to do with magic and electro-magnetism.

Imagine, however, if the Earth was now into the next Ice Age. Wouldn't almost everyone be clamoring to burn all the fossil fuels we could get our hands on? Anything to warm the planet up?

Coastal cities have sunk into the sea in the past. Dunwich, for example, was once a thriving port in the middle ages, but is now under the North Sea. The climate changes.

AND, areas that are meters above sea level, in the days when this is being written, was once meters under the sea level. This, AGAIN, is because the climate CHANGES, ALWAYS. But, when some express these OBVIOUS Facts it is like these OBVIOUS Facts somehow REMOVE the ALSO OBVIOUS Fact that the way human beings live influences 'climate change' in some way or another.

[Age]

Coastal cities have sunk into the sea in the past. Dunwich, for example, was once a thriving port in the middle ages, but is now under the North Sea. The climate changes.

Yeah, but back then there weren't a ton of scientists around noting that it all revolved around the burning of fossil fuels.

Sure, if you are able to convince yourself that this has little or nothing to do with human behavior...that it's all about Nature and climate, so be it. Just note that others disagree. And while the fossil fuel industry is awash in money revolving around the very nature of the capitalist political economy, not all scientists weighing in here are merely following the money themselves.

Then this part:

"Why did Dunwich fall into the sea?

In the Anglo-Saxon period, Dunwich was the capital of the Kingdom of the East Angles, but the harbour and most of the town have since disappeared due to coastal erosion."

Isn't erosion more a weather phenomenon?

And then the part when the next Ice Age does all but cripple vast chunks of "civilization" as we know it...is that just nature doing its thing? Spiritually or otherwise.

Then this part: https://astronomy.com/news/2019/04/the- ... ball-earth

Here, nature turns the whole planet itself into one gigantic "snowball".

Hard to imagine many human beings surviving the next rendition of that.

The point about Dunwich, or indeed the Neolithic optimum, is that climate changes without the need for fossil fuel emissions.

OF COURSE.

The climate, like the Universe, CHANGES, ALWAYS. ALWAYS HAS and ALWAYS WILL.

EVERY second of EVERY day of EVERY year, and thus ALWAYS, the climate IS A CHANGING.

The climate, ALSO, CHANGES WITH or WITHOUT fossil fuel emissions. BUT, WITH fossil fuel emission the climate WILL CHANGE DIFFERENTLY than it DID WITHOUT fossil fuel emission.

If absolutely ANY thing is False, Wrong, or Incorrect here, then PLEASE bring to light what THIS IS, EXACTLY, and Correct 'it'.

But the long term trend is definitely that the earth is cooling down, since its formation. If we can find a way of slowing this down, this is probably a good thing.

AGAIN, WHY do human beings WANT to CHANGE what Nature, ITSELF, is JUST DOING, Naturally?

Are they REALLY that self-centered, GREEDY, and SELFISH that they REALLY think or BELIEVE that CHANGING what Naturally HAPPENS and OCCURS is REALLY a so-called "good thing"?

And, let us NOT FORGET 'good' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

In other words, how could ANY thing that is, seemingly, 'good' for one human being or a collective of human beings REALLY be a 'good' 'thing'.

I would have thought what is 'good' for Nature, ITSELF, would be what is REALLY a 'good thing', and 'that' what MIGHT BE 'good' for a select few, WITHOUT ANY consideration for the REST of 'things' in Nature was ACTUALLY a 'bad thing' INDEED.

[Age]

Simply stating it doesn't make it true.

It is well known to archaeologists that climate has changed many times, and was much warmer in Neolithic times than it is now, for example.

Good idea then. Let's just ignore it and do nothing and keep pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere because the world 'used to be warmer/colder at various times' It's actually not that hard to change the climate of a planet. We might not be able to control the weather but we most certainly can alter the climate, and are. What do you think would happen if we had a nuclear war? Or would that be just a 'natural phenomenon' too that we don't need to worry about? At the time that the asteroid caused the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and megafauna humans were just small rat-like creatures (many still are). How well do you think modern humans would have survived that catastrophic and very SUDDEN climate change?
Your ridiculous superstition and delusional beliefs might seem 'cute' to some, but they are in fact anything but harmless. The world is full of delusional, superstitious, anti-science fuckwits who are doing their best to stuff things up for everyone.
You will find plenty of allies on here amongst the religious arseholes who stink up this forum. Morons like Walker and IC.
Since you mistrust 'science' so much then you should get off your computer. Stop using technology. Don't go to the doctor. Don't use electricity........

I'm not anti-technology. I'm simply anti being dependent on it.

BUT, is wanting to SLOW DOWN the long term trend, and the VERY NATURALLY OCCURRING, cooling down of the earth, AND, of finding a way of doing this ALL some form of a dependency on 'technology', itself?

Doing ANY thing, or even Wanting, to CHANGE what occurs Naturally, to me, would involve some form of dependency on 'technology'.

By the way, did you start this thread with the intention to end up talking about 'climate change', or did this thread just evolve this way?

[Walker]

“Climate change” is such a foggy notion.

What is the objective of, “climate change”?
What is to be done about this objective, whatever it is?
What action will achieve, whatever it is to be done?
What changes in human activity could have other than fantasy effects on future climate?

What’s to be done about the climate, and how?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uoa74e-DJtY

[Maia]

'Anti thinking' more like, and 'anti having a brain'. Perhaps your 'earth spirits' will help you if you need medication or surgery...

Why would you think I'm anti-medicine?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

'Anti thinking' more like, and 'anti having a brain'. Perhaps your 'earth spirits' will help you if you need medication or surgery...

Why would you think I'm anti-medicine?

Why wouldn't you be?

[Maia]

'Anti thinking' more like, and 'anti having a brain'. Perhaps your 'earth spirits' will help you if you need medication or surgery...

Why would you think I'm anti-medicine?

Why wouldn't you be?

Because I make a point of keeping myself fit and healthy, and don't like ingesting artificial chemicals.

Or were you being facetious?

[Maia]

Good idea then. Let's just ignore it and do nothing and keep pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere because the world 'used to be warmer/colder at various times' It's actually not that hard to change the climate of a planet. We might not be able to control the weather but we most certainly can alter the climate, and are. What do you think would happen if we had a nuclear war? Or would that be just a 'natural phenomenon' too that we don't need to worry about? At the time that the asteroid caused the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and megafauna humans were just small rat-like creatures (many still are). How well do you think modern humans would have survived that catastrophic and very SUDDEN climate change?
Your ridiculous superstition and delusional beliefs might seem 'cute' to some, but they are in fact anything but harmless. The world is full of delusional, superstitious, anti-science fuckwits who are doing their best to stuff things up for everyone.
You will find plenty of allies on here amongst the religious arseholes who stink up this forum. Morons like Walker and IC.
Since you mistrust 'science' so much then you should get off your computer. Stop using technology. Don't go to the doctor. Don't use electricity........

I'm not anti-technology. I'm simply anti being dependent on it.

BUT, is wanting to SLOW DOWN the long term trend, and the VERY NATURALLY OCCURRING, cooling down of the earth, AND, of finding a way of doing this ALL some form of a dependency on 'technology', itself?

Doing ANY thing, or even Wanting, to CHANGE what occurs Naturally, to me, would involve some form of dependency on 'technology'.

By the way, did you start this thread with the intention to end up talking about 'climate change', or did this thread just evolve this way?

It just evolved this way.

[Iwannaplato]

And just to demonstrate what reasoning is to the heathens we have ad homs, binary thinking, strawman arguments, misattributions, direct insults, false accusations, red herrings and other fallacies. Once some people have decided that they represent reason, they see little need to adhere to valid argument. Or they simply don't know much about reasoning.

[Sculptor]

Since magic is a delusion, and electromagnetism is a word used to describe replicable, experimental and observable phenomena it is hard to see what kind of question this is.

There is no doubt that after electromagnetism was described by science, unscrupulous "magicians" were known to use electromagnetic devices in their illusions. But beyond that there is very little else to say.

[Walker]

And do you have a point?

Boogie is related to woogie.

When a magnetic force boogies, iron woogies.

More boogie means more woogie means more cowbell.

And do you have a point?

By point, you must mean, have I drawn a conclusion from these facts?
Well, must I do everything?

You're a big fella.
Draw you own conclusions and share, if you must.

For now, I'm mulling these facts that have been revealed to us.
So are other folks. Mulling, that is.
There's no rush.

Let's see if these facts ring any bells other than foot stomping demands for an encore, which is all I'm hearing so far, from you.

This point emerged in gestating towards relevance. What others are still in hiding?

viewtopic.php?p=600178#p600178

[Walker]

Logically, if Maia weighs as much as a duck, she's made of wood. Therefore she's a witch

I own two powerful fishing magnets. I keep them apart.

Logic and reason tells me that if I would put one magnet to one side of my head, and the other magnet to the other side of my head, then the magnetic attraction would push on the sides of my head. As the magnets drew closer together, the attraction would grow stronger until my head was squished. I could experiment with this, however if the theory is right I wouldn't have the strength to pull the magnets apart before the damage was done ... so I keep the magnets apart.

However, aside from the squishing, what the hell would that do to the brain?