Global warming??
Feb 3rd 2014, 9:13 pm
#376
Dunroaming back in UK
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Expat in Yorkshire now
Posts: 11,318
Feb 3rd 2014, 10:04 pm
#377
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Algarve, Portugal
Posts: 391
Re: Global warming??
No one wants to mention the pink elephant in the room although jimemato did mention it he missed the point. This is the burgeoning human population. This is leading to deforestation, lost of natural habitat and species extinction on a massive scale. Personally I hope we don't discover how to harness fusion technology. This will only encourage some societies to have their families bang out 5-10 children each who will eat the planet. Forget just focusing on CO2 emissions as this is just a by-product of the main problem.
Feb 3rd 2014, 10:43 pm
#378
Straw Man.
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: That, there, that's not my post count... nothing to see here, move along.
Posts: 46,302
Re: Global warming??
No one wants to mention the pink elephant in the room although jimemato did mention it he missed the point. This is the burgeoning human population. This is leading to deforestation, lost of natural habitat and species extinction on a massive scale. Personally I hope we don't discover how to harness fusion technology. This will only encourage some societies to have their families bang out 5-10 children each who will eat the planet. Forget just focusing on CO2 emissions as this is just a by-product of the main problem.
Feb 3rd 2014, 11:05 pm
#379
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: East Seaxe
Posts: 72,935
Re: Global warming??
It's the bizarre assertion that there are "no facts" and that therefore nothing can be known that is pernicious. This leaves people completely open to being manipulated - including the big 2009 falsification of data case - and leads to just sitting helplessly around like great, thoughtless lumps while powerful vested interests carry on with whatever they wish.
The complete surrender of critical thought has never served humanity very well.
Feb 4th 2014, 1:47 am
#380
FreeThinker
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: the moors and levels
Posts: 9,702
Re: Global warming??
I don't even mind that really - I mean, people can read for themselves.
It's the bizarre assertion that there are "no facts" and that therefore nothing can be known that is pernicious. This leaves people completely open to being manipulated - including the big 2009 falsification of data case - and leads to just sitting helplessly around like great, thoughtless lumps while powerful vested interests carry on with whatever they wish.
The complete surrender of critical thought has never served humanity very well.
It's the bizarre assertion that there are "no facts" and that therefore nothing can be known that is pernicious. This leaves people completely open to being manipulated - including the big 2009 falsification of data case - and leads to just sitting helplessly around like great, thoughtless lumps while powerful vested interests carry on with whatever they wish.
The complete surrender of critical thought has never served humanity very well.
Feb 4th 2014, 1:50 am
#381
Dunroaming back in UK
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Expat in Yorkshire now
Posts: 11,318
Feb 4th 2014, 2:13 am
#383
Dunroaming back in UK
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Expat in Yorkshire now
Posts: 11,318
Re: Global warming??
Ah sorry will try and simplify it for you then. My bad!
You wrote "no facts assertion" - this is effectively saying the same thing twice as, in academic terms, an assertion is, by definition, something not based on facts. This error in saying the same thing twice is called a tautology. I am sure you will understand that you cannot have any other kind of assertion. Therefore, I thought you were confusing yourself with the tautology.My apologies for the confusion.
Henceforth, I think 2 things need to happen to avoid similar confusion in the future.
1. Those of us (Jo, Lion, Matt, Jo's Husband et al) with more education than you need to remember to couch things in laymen's terms to avoid confusing you unnecessarily.
2. If you would be so kind as to work on your clarity of expression it might help avoid you confusing people quite so much.
Hope that helps?
You wrote "no facts assertion" - this is effectively saying the same thing twice as, in academic terms, an assertion is, by definition, something not based on facts. This error in saying the same thing twice is called a tautology. I am sure you will understand that you cannot have any other kind of assertion. Therefore, I thought you were confusing yourself with the tautology.My apologies for the confusion.
Henceforth, I think 2 things need to happen to avoid similar confusion in the future.
1. Those of us (Jo, Lion, Matt, Jo's Husband et al) with more education than you need to remember to couch things in laymen's terms to avoid confusing you unnecessarily.
2. If you would be so kind as to work on your clarity of expression it might help avoid you confusing people quite so much.
Hope that helps?
Feb 4th 2014, 2:30 am
#384
FreeThinker
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: the moors and levels
Posts: 9,702
Re: Global warming??
Ah sorry will try and simplify it for you then. My bad!
You wrote "no facts assertion" - this is effectively saying the same thing twice as, in academic terms, an assertion is, by definition, something not based on facts. This error in saying the same thing twice is called a tautology. I am sure you will understand that you cannot have any other kind of assertion. Therefore, I thought you were confusing yourself with the tautology.My apologies for the confusion.
Henceforth, I think 2 things need to happen to avoid similar confusion in the future.
1. Those of us (Jo, Lion, Matt, Jo's Husband et al) with more education than you need to remember to couch things in laymen's terms to avoid confusing you unnecessarily.
2. If you would be so kind as to work on your clarity of expression it might help avoid you confusing people quite so much.
Hope that helps?
You wrote "no facts assertion" - this is effectively saying the same thing twice as, in academic terms, an assertion is, by definition, something not based on facts. This error in saying the same thing twice is called a tautology. I am sure you will understand that you cannot have any other kind of assertion. Therefore, I thought you were confusing yourself with the tautology.My apologies for the confusion.
Henceforth, I think 2 things need to happen to avoid similar confusion in the future.
1. Those of us (Jo, Lion, Matt, Jo's Husband et al) with more education than you need to remember to couch things in laymen's terms to avoid confusing you unnecessarily.
2. If you would be so kind as to work on your clarity of expression it might help avoid you confusing people quite so much.
Hope that helps?
Feb 4th 2014, 2:34 am
#385
Dunroaming back in UK
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Expat in Yorkshire now
Posts: 11,318
nice try but no banana
Feb 4th 2014, 2:38 am
#387
Dunroaming back in UK
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Expat in Yorkshire now
Posts: 11,318
Feb 4th 2014, 2:42 am
#389
Dunroaming back in UK
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Expat in Yorkshire now
Posts: 11,318
