Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

maure

Banning Water To Stop Climate Warming

Recommended Posts

I think the problem, at least in Spain, is that politicians are always trying to make "minorities" happy no matter how unfair it can be for the whole rest of the people. The noisier the minority the better, but worse for the rest of the people. It really works like a market and for the good of politicians and the leaders of the given minorities.

A minority is nothing. A person is everything. Politicians should look after people, all of them, and forget about minorities as such. Civil and political rights aren't for members of minorities, they are for persons. You're catholic, woman, gay, atheist... It doesn't matter. Live and let live.

This is exactly what needed to be said. Thanks.

In a society like the one in the U.S. today (and I assume many other nations with good qualities of life), when you make yourself a needy, discriminated-against minority, you become subject to prejudice. When you don't make an issue of it, no one else will. This is why I haven't experienced prejudice for my lack of religion, yet others have. Drop the titles you put on yourself (especially victim), drop the titles you put on others, stop clinging to isolated incidents, and respect those you want to respect you even if they aren't respecting you yet, and you'll find the majority of people don't even give what you are a thought. I don't deny there have been problems with prejudice in the past, but now I feel as though most of those problems come as a result of the groups wanting there to be prejudice against them; they consciously ask for it, in a way, by identifying themselves as some label (it's often worse to label yourself than to label others).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly what needed to be said. Thanks.

In a society like the one in the U.S. today (and I assume many other nations with good qualities of life), when you make yourself a needy, discriminated-against minority, you become subject to prejudice. When you don't make an issue of it, no one else will. This is why I haven't experienced prejudice for my lack of religion, yet others have. Drop the titles you put on yourself (especially victim), drop the titles you put on others, stop clinging to isolated incidents, and respect those you want to respect you even if they aren't respecting you yet, and you'll find the majority of people don't even give what you are a thought. I don't deny there have been problems with prejudice in the past, but now I feel as though most of those problems come as a result of the groups wanting there to be prejudice against them; they consciously ask for it, in a way, by identifying themselves as some label (it's often worse to label yourself than to label others).

Sounds like a "put up or shut up" kind of doctrine to me. Atheists, outspoken or otherwise, as well as homosexuals receive nothing like the level of discrimination in the UK that they do in the US. Whether you like it or not, your country's over obsession with religion does cause people to become oppressed, and the argument that in all cases it has to to with being outspoken is just laughable. Go to the bible belt and admit you are an Atheist, the reaction you get is likely to be more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a "put up or shut up" kind of doctrine to me. Atheists, outspoken or otherwise, as well as homosexuals receive nothing like the level of discrimination in the UK that they do in the US. Whether you like it or not, your country's over obsession with religion does cause people to become oppressed, and the argument that in all cases it has to to with being outspoken is just laughable. Go to the bible belt and admit you are an Atheist, the reaction you get is likely to be more interesting.

Why? I have family living in the USA and they don't feel oppressed at all. Maybe it's you, your mentality, what makes you feel atheists live oppresed in the USA. If 200 millions had to put up with every single claim from radicals, living in the country would be a nightmare. Maybe it's what some extremists want after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? I have family living in the USA and they don't feel oppressed at all. Maybe it's you, your mentality, what makes you feel atheists live oppresed in the USA. If 200 millions had to put up with every single claim from radicals, living in the country would be a nightmare. Maybe it's what some extremists want after all.

Like I said, I know a large number of Atheists from the US. It's nothing to do with my mentality, I don't even live in the US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me for such a long, somewhat repetitive, and very much off-topic post.

Sounds like a "put up or shut up" kind of doctrine to me. Atheists, outspoken or otherwise, as well as homosexuals receive nothing like the level of discrimination in the UK that they do in the US. Whether you like it or not, your country's over obsession with religion does cause people to become oppressed, and the argument that in all cases it has to to with being outspoken is just laughable. Go to the bible belt and admit you are an Atheist, the reaction you get is likely to be more interesting.

I debated responding or letting it go, and I know the right thing would have been the latter, but I couldn't resist.

I think your use of the word "oppressed" is really far too severe, and that's been my point. I will not deny that atheists, homosexuals, whomevers will, in some cases with some people, face problems. In fact, everyone faces prejudice for who they are; even in America, there are Christians who face prejudice, despite your choice to believe Christians are some evil power that has no empathy. Oppressed? I don't think a few insults or misunderstandings qualifies as "oppressed." Being denied employment, being denied opportunities, that's oppression. The law in the United States, laws made by those non-atheist non-homosexual non-whatever-is-being-oppressed people you are so critical of, protects them from the extremely rare (but extremely hyped by the media) cases where this does happen. To use the word oppression on what those people, what all people experience at some point at varying degrees of severity, is insulting to people who truly are oppressed for what they are or what they believe in.

I believe, too, that there was a misunderstanding in the "outspoken" portion, and I will even take the blame on myself for that; perhaps I was unclear. I do not mean every single case where there is a misunderstanding or a problem (I refuse to call an off-comment from one Christian about one atheist "oppression;" give me hard proof that the law works against them, that the "man" works against them...don't give me "adult bullying" examples. There are people who are just as intolerant of religious people as there are people intolerant of non-religious ones; respect is a two-way street and from you, I only see you wanting it to come your way but you have no willingness to give any back based on how you speak of Christians), so to say "all cases" is an exaggeration of what I said. As for outspoken, I mean to say this: if you look for a fight, you get one. There's a time, a place, a way to present these details. If you're disrespectful, if you're offensive, if you're doing it for the sole purpose to rile someone, well, it's not going to end well. You'll find that if all you choose to view are the horror stories of people who victimize themselves by overreacting to off-comments or this or that (and I am talking about people on Facebook groups or wherever, not talking about people who have pre-existing mental conditions that, in severe cases, end up taking their lives as a result of these circumstances; wanted to clear that up as to not offend) you only get one view: that everyone who is an atheist has it worse than everyone who is a Christian and it is all because of over-religious dictators running a republic. In reality, with both sides of the story, you'll see that there are extremes on both ends, sure, but most people are willing to respect, and most people are respected. There will always be exceptions...U.S., U.K., gay, straight, atheist Christian, whatever, wherever. Most people aren't like that, and to call it "oppression" is sensationalism and just shows that you're exaggerating to create a problem you want to exist, and have really taken everything in a narrow, context-less focus.

So we go to the last part, then, the Bible belt. I am a NASCAR fan, and NASCAR is deeply rooted in the Southeast. As a result, the NASCAR community that I post on is made up of nearly 90% Caucasian, Southeastern, Christian males. And believe me, they are strongly religious, to the point that yes, religion has been discussed in the off-topic section of that forum. I did reveal I was an atheist. Not one insult. Not a single insult. No one tried to convert me, nothing offensive. A forum of a few hundred Southeastern Caucasians and not one did what you personally would have expected (or even wanted). Some ignored it, sure, but at least they had that restraint if it did bother them. Others ignored it because it meant nothing to them. And those who did respond were polite; some asked for an explanation of what I believed in, or how I viewed life, or where I turned when things weren't going correctly. They wanted understanding; imagine that. It was a great conversation. Why? Because I came in respectful of what they were discussing, I never pretended I was 100% correct, I never went in with the intention of changing their views, etc. I gave respect. They gave it back. Like the vast majority of people, outside of isolated incidents that no one witnessed (and we all exaggerate what happens to us for sympathy), would do. I do not mean to generalize based on this sample, but in the same way, you should not generalize based on your sample. Every part of every nation there are people who will tolerate, people who will appreciate, people who will celebrate, and of course, people who will hate. But you get what you give, and if you want people to accept you, you need to accept them.

I've admitted that I will see a bit of what I want, sure. But I feel you're doing the same, and unlike me, you haven't admitted that. Be fair and be respectful if you want the same toward you, who you are, and even what you are. That's all there is to it. Making massive issues out of a few cases and making generalizations is exactly what breeds the attitudes some people have toward atheists or any other group of people, and yet I see it in this thread. Avoid that mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how PC he is, but he's a sound, logical-thinking guy and a very decent human being... I'd vote him for president too but maybe his dreams lie somewhere else XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how PC he is, but he's a sound, logical-thinking guy and a very decent human being... I'd vote him for president too but maybe his dreams lie somewhere else XD

That being the case, politics really wouldn't suit him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That being the case, politics really wouldn't suit him!

That's the problem :D

Yes but nobody's perfect. If it's a choice between Eric, a woman and a black man... :P

Yeah, go on spoiling a nice moment :mf_tongue:

(XDDD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you hate it when nature just doesn't behave:

Interview: Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

Tide gauging is very complicated, because it gives different answers for wherever you are in the world. But we have to rely on geology when we interpret it. So, for example, those people in the IPCC [intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], choose Hong Kong, which has six tide gauges, and they choose the record of one, which gives 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level. Every geologist knows that that is a subsiding area. It’s the compaction of sediment; it is the only record which you shouldn’t use.

Now, back to satellite altimetry, which shows the water, not just the coasts, but in the whole of the ocean. And you measure it by satellite. From 1992 to 2002, [the graph of the sea level] was a straight line, variability along a straight line, but absolutely no trend whatsoever

Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [iPCC’s] publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge.

It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a “correction factor,” which they took from the [Hong Kong] tide gauge.

It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you don’t say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!

http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf

Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and

Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden.

He is past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission

on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and

leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. Dr. Mörner has

been studying the sea level and its effects on coastal areas for

some 35 years. He was interviewed by Gregory Murphy on

June 6 for EIR. [June 22, 2007]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unaffiliated: 0 no Atheists

Says all you need to know about the attitude of a lot of Americans to those of us who choose not to believe.

Or it could just be taken as evidence that we atheists don't crave power / control over other people and so don't go in to politics. :P

PS - Eric gets my vote for Pres anytime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you hate it when nature just doesn't behave:

Interview: Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

Tide gauging is very complicated, because it gives different answers for wherever you are in the world. But we have to rely on geology when we interpret it. So, for example, those people in the IPCC [intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], choose Hong Kong, which has six tide gauges, and they choose the record of one, which gives 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level. Every geologist knows that that is a subsiding area. It’s the compaction of sediment; it is the only record which you shouldn’t use.

Now, back to satellite altimetry, which shows the water, not just the coasts, but in the whole of the ocean. And you measure it by satellite. From 1992 to 2002, [the graph of the sea level] was a straight line, variability along a straight line, but absolutely no trend whatsoever

Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [iPCC’s] publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge.

It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a “correction factor,” which they took from the [Hong Kong] tide gauge.

It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you don’t say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!

http://www.climatech...erinterview.pdf

Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and

Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden.

He is past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission

on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and

leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. Dr. Mörner has

been studying the sea level and its effects on coastal areas for

some 35 years. He was interviewed by Gregory Murphy on

June 6 for EIR. [June 22, 2007]

So in short, fiddling the facts to fit the expected results. Next they'll say that the world actually is flat....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you hate it when nature just doesn't behave:

Interview: Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

Tide gauging is very complicated, because it gives different answers for wherever you are in the world. But we have to rely on geology when we interpret it. So, for example, those people in the IPCC [intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], choose Hong Kong, which has six tide gauges, and they choose the record of one, which gives 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level. Every geologist knows that that is a subsiding area. It’s the compaction of sediment; it is the only record which you shouldn’t use.

Now, back to satellite altimetry, which shows the water, not just the coasts, but in the whole of the ocean. And you measure it by satellite. From 1992 to 2002, [the graph of the sea level] was a straight line, variability along a straight line, but absolutely no trend whatsoever

Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [iPCC’s] publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge.

It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a “correction factor,” which they took from the [Hong Kong] tide gauge.

It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you don’t say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!

http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf

Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and

Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden.

He is past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission

on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and

leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. Dr. Mörner has

been studying the sea level and its effects on coastal areas for

some 35 years. He was interviewed by Gregory Murphy on

June 6 for EIR. [June 22, 2007]

Oh look who's back! After playing the attention seeking 'I am leaving forever because someone wasn't nice to me boo hoo' card, you've been nice enough to return. So wonderful to have you back posting crap again. So this is your new poster boy is it, someone known for being a big fan of dowsing. But none of that matters. What matters is he is someone with letters against his name who has said something against the consensus about climate. So he is the new hero of the climate conspiracy movement, hey what if we are scraping the bottom of the barrel, he said there is no sea level rise, let's praise him deify him anoint him the new poster boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cav

Good to see that the quality of your debate is on a par with usual Cav invective and typical pro GW stance - Rather than discuss facts they just insult and slag off people.

Pathetic.

The wind of change is blowing re GW. Has it dawned on you yet that you are backing the wrong horse?

I have nothing more to say to you so don't even bother replying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought those people with "letters against their names" were experts, trained and qualified to know what they're talking about? Obviously I must be wrong. I must be. There's no other option for me other than to say I'm wrong. Our own pleasant as always, medium clairvoyant walking dictionary/thesaurus expert in everything you can ever think of has dismissed that having letters against your name actually counts for anything.

I'll wait for a response. Tell you what, I'll predict the response:-

This has nothing to do with you, how dare you have an opinion, you talk utter nonsense -insert personal attack here- Everything is Fernando Alonso's fault. I hate Fernando Alonso. Don't ever backchat me again, you're just a woman, I have nothing to say to you. Don't ever post on TF1 again.

Sarcasm. Sh#t wit, but satisfying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cav

Good to see that the quality of your debate is on a par with usual Cav invective and typical pro GW stance - Rather than discuss facts they just insult and slag off people.

Pathetic.

The wind of change is blowing re GW. Has it dawned on you yet that you are backing the wrong horse?

I have nothing more to say to you so don't even bother replying.

Debate with you until you throw another 'I am leaving' tantrum?

Comment a post taht basically suggests 'hey we dug up this guy who says there is no sea level rise therefore there is no sea level rise'?

I am not backing anything, that's your problem, you look on it as backing a horse and sticking up for your horse, which is why you have zero objectivity. This is like backign a sports tea for you, pick a side and stick to it.

No I can't be bothered. Instead I will post many interesting things about the ONLY guy with any credentials you have found to back your stance:

http://www.randi.org/hotline/1998/0012.html

http://www.edf.org/documents/3868_morner_exposed.pdf

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/11/the_australians_war_on_science_24.php

This is like football for you, having picked your side you're now crawling around looking for anything that supports your view and ignoring everything that doesn't. You're just pathetic.

Hello Steph, I see you're wading in because I have attacked another TF1 old guard. I'll do that for anyone who comes in pompously posting rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So your response is:

1) a totally irrelevant piece of information that has no bearing on the science in question. Leonardo da Vinci believed in an invisible supernatural mega-being; Isaac Newton wrote more papers on the occult than he did on science. So what? Does not diminish their scientific capabilities. An attempt at character assassination - usual approach it seems from pro-GW supporters.

2) A copy of a letter (on a site that is conspicuously pro GW) complaining that he is quoting references to a scientific body only several months after he left. I, along with most people have lied on my CV. Does not mean that I can't do my job probably. Again another attempt at character assassination rather than looking at the science.

3) Finally an article that references the study and says there is a more recent study that disagrees. Fair enough. Except that the authors are funded from pro-GW funding so naturally their study supports GW. On this one I would say jury is out.

And you say *I* am posting rubbish???

And now on the personal attacks. Your first message to me as usual is a personal attack and you carry on in further postings.

But thank you sincerely for reminding me why I left TF1 in the first place. I got totally fed up reading your arrogant, childish, petulant, aggressive, biased postings that usually end up with a personal attack. You do it so often you don't even realise you are doing it.

You are, sir an @ss and I now feel sorry that I have wasted minutes of my life responding to you which I will never get back. I'm sticking you on ignore and will not waste a microsecond more of my existence reading your dribble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few days back, a friend sent me an old 80s(?) video about getting ready for the next ice age. Don't have the link anymore but it should not be difficult to find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...