Remember me
▼ Content

irrational exuberance



Page 1 of 212>
irrational exuberance26-10-2021 22:34
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
Lots of irrational exuberance in many places - places like this, the stock market, the real estate market, covid. They can't all be right can they? Some things look parabolic and that sort of thing never ends well. There's a lot more cash available than there normally is. That could keep things going - king dollar is powerful. King dollar won't say much about the issue of to vaccinate or not to vaccinate. There is much irrational exuberance about the dangers of vaccinating and the dangers of not vaccinating. Take your pick.
Like the song says, "Some of the lies are believing."
Edited on 26-10-2021 23:07
27-10-2021 00:00
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
Example of, "Some of the lies are believing." = "Rust."
27-10-2021 00:04
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2621)
Do you have a point?
27-10-2021 00:08
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".
27-10-2021 02:32
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3804)
keepit wrote:
I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".


I have been looking. Covid is essentially a 'cold' virus, for which vaccines have proven worthless. The symptoms aren't considered severe enough in the overwhelming vast majority of cases to pursue. It's not a 'stable' virus, mutates frequently. Vaccines early in a pandemic have proven less effect, as a virus will evolve an adapt quite a bit, initially. The dominant strain changes frequently. mRNA technology has been around for about 20 years. Originally a cancer therapy. Considering the huge potential, it never really got much attention, until covid. Have to wonder why, after 20 years, it's now the miracle 'cure' for all of our problems, if everyone would just take the shot. Vaccines help protect an individual, not a population. The vaccines don't provide long term protection (still studying), boosters required 6-8 months. The mass vaccination scheme is an experiment. No one knows if it'll work, how many boosters, or how often they will be need, to maintain a sufficient level of immunity. Obviously, there is no data, on the long term, cumulative effects, of repeated jabs, of the mRNA covid vaccines. Something that won't be known, until years after the pandemic.

In the meantime, politicians have 'free-rein' using the national credit card, to spend as they please. Usually to enrich themselves, the states they 'represent', and steal power and control, to ensure they will be able to continue after the crisis passes. The legislative fighting isn't about what's best for America, it's each congressman fighting for their fair share of free money, power, and control.
27-10-2021 05:14
keepit
★★★★★
(2351)
Harvey,
Based on your responses to the covid issue, your looking, as you say, hasn't been sufficient to uncover other points of view about covid, other than the one (a cold) that you're so hung up on.
27-10-2021 06:15
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


keepit wrote:I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".

... except that there are far more than only two sides ... and your "side" isn't even one of them. Your babblings on the topic are summarily discarded. You refuse to ground your gibberish in any sort of reality by establishing any points that are actually correct. You refuse to post anything that is true.

*THEN* you feel the need to find fault with the much better positions of others who know so much more than you do.

keepit wrote:Harvey, Based on your responses to the covid issue, your looking, as you say, hasn't been sufficient to help the government promulgate lots of irrational fear or to help me promulgate my abject pessimism of life in general.


Well, that's all true. Harvey tends to take a pragmatic approach that only considers actual observations as opposed to obsessing over fabricated hype.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-10-2021 07:49
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3804)
keepit wrote:
Harvey,
Based on your responses to the covid issue, your looking, as you say, hasn't been sufficient to uncover other points of view about covid, other than the one (a cold) that you're so hung up on.


Well, there are thousands of health care workers, who have dealt with the ICU overflowing with neck-tube recipients dying on a daily basis. Corpses stacked like cord-wood, in the back of U-Hail truck. Some with Phds. These people refusing vaccine mandates?

Vast majority of severe covid cases, are in those near, or exceed the average life expectancy. They have nothing to lose, and willing to pay any price, to buy just a little more time. The price, is national debt, other people's lives and freedom, well worth even one more day of breathing (without a neck tube).

It's no secret that anyone dies, and tested positive for covid, is listed as a covid fatality. Even if covid had very little, to nothing to do with the actual cause of death. Nothing wrong with it either, the data could be useful for further study. It's more complete to do it this way, than to have thousands of medical examiners make the determination, and decide if covid was a significant factor. Not to mention complete autopsies, are time consuming, and expensive. Many cities can afford it, don't have the time, or storage for thousands of dead bodies. Families tend to want their insurance check, dump the body in a hole, or burn it, move on.

Politically, most of or elected officials are near, or past the average life expectancy. Have lived an active, wholesome, healthy lifestyle. But, more than willing to sacrifice the entire country, is they can buy just one more day...
27-10-2021 13:07
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(676)
In order to cultivate the viruses and vaccines they need a fetal serum which needs to be extracted while the fetus is still alive and withouth anesthetics. Therefore around 2 million of pregnant cows are cut open without anesthetics to get an acess to a fetus which also will be cut open alive to extract the blood from the beating heart to get the precious fetal serum.
The process with human aborted fetuses must be basically the same. The fetus needs to be alive to get the serum or cells of the kidneys etc.
As you can see the whole vaccine industry is based on butchering the fetuses alive.
Edited on 27-10-2021 13:07
27-10-2021 17:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


Xadoman wrote:In order to cultivate the viruses and vaccines they need a fetal serum which needs to be extracted while the fetus is still alive and withouth anesthetics. Therefore around 2 million of pregnant cows are cut open without anesthetics to get an acess to a fetus which also will be cut open alive to extract the blood from the beating heart to get the precious fetal serum.

I think this is just as good a time as any to discuss your gullibility. Yes, yes, we have extensively covered your Safemoon HODLing ... but I think we also need to address your PETA membership.

Worth mentioning is that keepit is the only poster on this site who will believe you when you regurgitate activist tabloid articles.

Xadoman wrote: The process with human aborted fetuses must be basically the same.

Except that human fetuses don't have to be checked to see if they are chewing their cud at the moment.

Xadoman wrote:The fetus needs to be alive to get the serum or cells of the kidneys etc.

Why do you believe this? How does a serum know when life ends so that it knows when to make itself unobtainable?

Xadoman wrote:As you can see the whole vaccine industry is based on butchering the fetuses alive.

Let's make a cryptocurrency that has fetus butchery as a transaction fee. It will moon, right?

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-10-2021 19:20
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(676)
Why do you believe this? How does a serum know when life ends so that it knows when to make itself unobtainable?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11971757/

Fetal bovine serum (FBS) is a common component of animal cell culture media. It is harvested from bovine fetuses taken from pregnant cows during slaughter. FBS is commonly harvested by means of a cardiac puncture without any form of anaesthesia. Fetuses are probably exposed to pain and/or discomfort, so the current practice of fetal blood harvesting is inhumane. Apart from moral concerns, several scientific and technical problems exist with regard to the use of FBS in cell culture. Efforts should be made to reduce the use of FBS or, preferably, to replace it with synthetic alternatives.
28-10-2021 04:16
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


It is harvested from bovine fetuses taken from pregnant cows during slaughter.

I just watched a video of the procedure. A bovine fetus is removed by caesarian and the cow was healed a couple of weeks later.

FBS is commonly harvested by means of a cardiac puncture without any form of anaesthesia.

The cow was under full anesthesia. There was no cardiac puncture.

Fetuses are probably exposed to pain and/or discomfort, so the current practice of fetal blood harvesting is inhumane.

The fetus was already dead prior to the harvesting, ergo it didn't feel a thing.

Apart from moral concerns,

There don't seem to be any moral concerns.

... several scientific and technical problems exist with regard to the use of FBS in cell culture.

There are no scientific or technical problems mentioned here.

Efforts should be made to reduce the use of FBS or, preferably, to replace it with synthetic alternatives.

There is no reason identified as to why such efforts should be made.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
28-10-2021 19:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
keepit wrote:
I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".

The both sides of what?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
28-10-2021 21:37
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2621)
Into the Night wrote:
keepit wrote:
I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".

The both sides of what?

... the Christocoin??

28-10-2021 22:24
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2182)
I thought it was very clear that he meant we should look at both sides of climate.


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
Attached image:

29-10-2021 03:01
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2621)
Wow that's some REALLY delicious looking climate you got grilled up there... YUM!! More climate, please!!!
29-10-2021 05:58
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


gfm7175 wrote:Wow that's some REALLY delicious looking climate you got grilled up there... YUM!! More climate, please!!!

Exactly! How can you ask for more? ... except maybe to ask for more.

This is why I am such a proponent of Climate reuse.
Attached image:

29-10-2021 06:06
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2182)
IBdaMann wrote:


gfm7175 wrote:Wow that's some REALLY delicious looking climate you got grilled up there... YUM!! More climate, please!!!

Exactly! How can you ask for more? ... except maybe to ask for more.

This is why I am such a proponent of Climate reuse.


...and I see exacty what you have done here. You have not only given us more, but you have allowed for us to see both sides without crossing to the other side. Brilliant!

I will be pursuing more climate.


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
Edited on 29-10-2021 06:07
29-10-2021 07:27
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
gfm7175 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
keepit wrote:
I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".

The both sides of what?

... the Christocoin??


You bring up a great point. I only provided the "Tails" side of the coin.

I need to fix that.

.
Attached image:

29-10-2021 09:22
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
keepit wrote:
I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".


Regards the climate debate I have thoroughly looked at both sides of the debate and as a rational adult have concluded the alarmism is not well founded or scientific.At the climate alarmist meeting I went to a few Sundays ago I asked the question.Is the Maldives still there?It is.Is there still ice and polar bears at the Arctic.Yes there is.I could keep going but you get my drift


duncan61
29-10-2021 17:59
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


duncan61 wrote:
keepit wrote:I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".
Regards the climate debate I have thoroughly looked at both sides of the debate and as a rational adult have concluded the alarmism is not well founded or scientific.

... except that you totally embrace all the same Greenhosue Effect dogma because you think it all makes "perfect sense" by a different name and by claiming the cause is gravity instead of greenhouse gas ... just like a totally irrational person.

You don't get any brownie points for trying to sweep your stupid, irrational dishonest religious beliefs under the carpet and pretending to focus on why some other identical religion is somehow lesser than your own.

Your belief that gravity can create thermal energy out of nothing is stupid. You're not fooling me into thinking that your faith is somehow brilliant just because you are critiquing Global Warming as being just as bad.

duncan61 wrote: At the climate alarmist meeting I went to ...

Talk to us about how ATE makes so much more sense. Explain how scientific it is to claim that CO2 in pressurized canisters never cools to the ambient temperature of the garage in which they are stored.

We already know that Global Warming is bunk. Explain why your religion is "thien-tiffick."

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
29-10-2021 20:16
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3804)
Human ego tells us we know it all, and can control everything. In reality, we don't know near all we think we do. We would no longer need science, if we had already learned it all. Science is mostly just the best explanation, until somebody comes up with something better. Humans are good at making tools. Not just tools to perform work, but to also study. Makes it a lot easier to learn things, if you can see clearer. Although, I have some doubts, about the value of gravity wheels...
29-10-2021 23:32
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


HarveyH55 wrote: In reality, we don't know near all we think we do.

I know enough to know that I only know what I know I know.

HarveyH55 wrote: We would no longer need science, if we had already learned it all.

Have you ever heard the phrase "42 is the answer to the universal question ... but if you ever learn what that universal question is, the answer will immediately change"?

A famous mathematician by the name of Kurt Gödel developed some theorems that proved mathematically that even if someone were to learn a denumerably infinite set of facts/axioms/datums about a system, e.g. nature, that there will always be something TRUE about the system that cannot be concluded/realized via application of the rules of logic/math to that infinite system.

Here's where my question comes in. If that unprovable but TRUE statement is then included to the already infinite set of facts/axioms/datums, a new unprovable statement is born that is nonetheless TRUE about the system. Ergo, no one can "learn it all." I'm tempted to call it the Harvey theorem ... but Kurt Gödel did beat you to it by about a hundred years.

HarveyH55 wrote:Science is mostly just the best explanation, until somebody comes up with something better.

I have a comment about this statement and you will want to scream "semantics!" when I make it but the word "explanation" is not the word you should be using.

Science does not "explain" why anything is as it is. Science simply states what cause will have what effect or what relationships exist in nature but has nothing to say as to why any of it happens to be the case. There are no explanations in science. The cause simply causes the effect.

This is a sticky point because theories that claim to provide explanations are just unfalsifiable theories, typically speculations of the past, and are specifically not science. Darwin's theory of evolution is a great example. It is, in fact, one possible explanation for the current state of life on planet Earth. However, Christian-hating Marxists err when they refer to the theory as science (Christian-hating Marxists refer to every absurd aspect of their dogma as "science"). Christians who believe in a young earth don't particularly care much for this theory which assumes a much older earth.

Similarly, the Big Bang is one possible, but nonetheless unfalsifiable, explanation of why we have the observable universe that we observe. It is not science.

Don't confuse "explaining nature" with "explaining science." Anyone can explain the falsifiable relationships of science but only unfalsifiable theories can speculate on explanations of nature.

HarveyH55 wrote: Humans are good at making tools.

I tend to qualify this by adding that humans are the only species that produce tools for the purpose of making other tools. There are animals that make tools, by making use of something as a tool, but it is always just one level deep.

I have just heard too many times someone from the "animals are better/smarter/more worthy than humans" crowd that animals are "better" at making tools because with them it's totally natural and instinctive whereas it's totally artificial with humans ... and of course animals don't abuse their skills by creating firearms or oppressive capitalism.

HarveyH55 wrote: Not just tools to perform work, but to also study. Makes it a lot easier to learn things, if you can see clearer. A

... or to hear the audio version if you cannot.

HarveyH55 wrote:lthough, I have some doubts, about the value of gravity wheels...

If what James__ is pursuing works out then he'll have options when he moves to Australia.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-10-2021 13:44
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
IBdaMann wrote:


duncan61 wrote:
keepit wrote:I guess the simplest point is "Look at both sides".
Regards the climate debate I have thoroughly looked at both sides of the debate and as a rational adult have concluded the alarmism is not well founded or scientific.

... except that you totally embrace all the same Greenhosue Effect dogma because you think it all makes "perfect sense" by a different name and by claiming the cause is gravity instead of greenhouse gas ... just like a totally irrational person.

You don't get any brownie points for trying to sweep your stupid, irrational dishonest religious beliefs under the carpet and pretending to focus on why some other identical religion is somehow lesser than your own.

Your belief that gravity can create thermal energy out of nothing is stupid. You're not fooling me into thinking that your faith is somehow brilliant just because you are critiquing Global Warming as being just as bad.

duncan61 wrote: At the climate alarmist meeting I went to ...

Talk to us about how ATE makes so much more sense. Explain how scientific it is to claim that CO2 in pressurized canisters never cools to the ambient temperature of the garage in which they are stored.

We already know that Global Warming is bunk. Explain why your religion is "thien-tiffick."

.


Nice try to pick a fight.Once again a poster called Pete came on and explained the relationship between gravity and the atmosphere which I understood and had never considered.You have tacked on all the other claims of additional energy


duncan61
30-10-2021 19:09
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)


duncan61 wrote:Nice try to pick a fight.

Excellent EVASION.

duncan61 wrote:Once again a poster called Pete came on and explained the relationship between gravity and the atmosphere

Pete Rogers specifically preached ATE and you served as his choir. You never, ever, ever, ever questioned anything he wrote and you never called boolsch't on any of his stupid crap. You have always insisted that all of his physics violations "make perfect sense."

You are a totally dishonest fu'uucc on this topic and here you are again pretending to bash on a competing denomination of your Greenhouse Effect faith in an attempt to virtue signal to others of your church in the exact same way that Christian-hating Marxists mindlessly bash on Christians to promote themselves before other Marxists. You have done nothing but defend Pete Rogers' ideas like you are desperate to get him to date you.

How is any of this my fault?

duncan61 wrote: ... which I understood and had never considered.

How did you somehow understand it when it isn't true because it violates physics? How do you justify ignoring all of the multiple explanations from multiple angles from multiple posters of how all of Pete Rogers' crap is not only wrong but is totally absurd? You ignore it all.

The only rational conclusion I can reach at the moment is that either you are secretely and dishonestly in league with Pete Rogers to promote his/your faith or you are desperate for Pete Rogers to bend you over a credenza.

I see how you are quick to encourage people to lose money participating in a scam so I am inclined to go with the former. You are dishonest.

duncan61 wrote:You have tacked on all the other claims of additional energy

Like I said, you are totally dishonest. I highlighted all the specific claims that Pete Rogers made in my responses to you and you responded saying that they make perfect sense. Now you are dishonestly pretending that I was somehow the source of Pete Rogers' claims. You are a fuu'ucccing moron and a liar.

I just happen to hate liars.

... and of course you began this little flurry by pretending that my observation was somehow an attempt to pick a fight ... because you are such a victim ... and by totally EVADING the main observation that you are simply sucking up to Pete Rogers for reasons that you will not disclose.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-10-2021 07:38
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
Cool fight.How does gravity defy physics?I need to share something.I came on to this forum to glean information as a young hippie chick claimed CO2 from the bad white males was overheating the planet and we are all going to die.I have come into this forum open minded and willing to learn.You and ITN seem to know everything about everything and sometimes you are wrong.Please explain how much you knew about crypto currencies in 2005.If every other human on the planet wishes to call it fossil fuels get over it.Carbon was formed from organic matter.The laws of physics are open to your personal interpretation and you make them fit.At first I discarded that the AGW/CC was political but Greta latest work demonises colonialism and at no point has she ever suggest a solution just demands action.I have watched some good debates recently and the alarmists side always breaks down as nothing has or will happen.I am rapidly concluding you extreme deniers of everything are worse than the warmazombies.My man at the CCL meeting I went to was honest enough to agree it is a feel good exersize to be an eco champion and climate warrior and boasted about how good it was to meet XYZ politicians.The guy works from home as a computer programmer and his wife takes the kids to school and does the local shopping so having solar panels at home and an electric car works for them.The CCL is their social club.In any debate if it gets emotional like you clearly are and start calling anyone dishonest and a liar breaks the rules of the debate.This site is called climate-debate FFS
31-10-2021 12:04
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
duncan61 wrote:How does gravity defy physics?

It doesn't anymore than you will be honest, because you are Pete Rogers' tool.

duncan61 wrote:I need to share something.

This is your setup for a lie. Well, go ahead.

duncan61 wrote:I came on to this forum to glean information ...

Nope. You came here to preach and definitely not to listen to what anyone has to say.

duncan61 wrote: ...as a young hippie chick claimed CO2 from the bad white males was overheating the planet

... and you needed to push the nonsense that GRAVITY, which doesn't come from the bad white males, was overheating the planet, ... in order to curry favor with Pete Rogers.

Yeah ... I'm so fooled.

duncan61 wrote:.I have come into this forum open minded and willing to learn.

Booool'scht. You came to this forum totally closed-minded and unwilling to learn anything, even math or science, that contradicts Pete Rogers' brand of Greenhouse Effect. You came to this site to unabashedly announce your complete disdain for science and math and for your need for Pete Rogers' approval.

duncan61 wrote:You and ITN seem to know everything about everything

In your next life, try not sleeping through highschool.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-10-2021 14:18
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
Nothing about the term fossil fuels,carbon or the laws of physics which I have just read again and can find no correlation to the weather or climate which has many variables.I have never met Pete Rodgers and probably never will.I have shared how gravity makes the air denser at the surface and is a factor in the weather amongst many other things with a lot of people and they get it because it makes sense and like many things few people consider this.Fail to understand why it is such a big deal to you.Again you are tacking on the greenhouse and warming stuff.Gravity and the atmosphere just are.Thats it
31-10-2021 17:41
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
duncan61 wrote:Nothing about the term fossil fuels,carbon or the laws of physics which I have just read again and can find no correlation to the weather or climate which has many variables.

To the best of your scientific acumen, you find no correlation between the weather and the laws of physics? Perhaps this also explains why you think gravity can somehow increase temperature
without additional energy while you nonetheless call other people stupid for making similarly absurd claims.

You claim that you came to this site with an open mind wishing to learn. Prove it. Write out an admission in your own words expressing that you understand that your above statement is stupid and that it is stupid to believe that gravity can increase the temperature of any mass without any additional energy and that it is stupid to build a science model on the conflation of past and present tenses in grammar.

I am presently convinced that you are a dishonest lying schytt who cannot make such an admission which is straightforward and is too easy for any honest person.

duncan61 wrote:I have never met Pete Rodgers

You are his groupie nonetheless.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-11-2021 01:14
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
IBdaMann wrote:


HarveyH55 wrote: In reality, we don't know near all we think we do.

I know enough to know that I only know what I know I know.

HarveyH55 wrote: We would no longer need science, if we had already learned it all.

Have you ever heard the phrase "42 is the answer to the universal question ... but if you ever learn what that universal question is, the answer will immediately change"?

A famous mathematician by the name of Kurt Gödel developed some theorems that proved mathematically that even if someone were to learn a denumerably infinite set of facts/axioms/datums about a system, e.g. nature, that there will always be something TRUE about the system that cannot be concluded/realized via application of the rules of logic/math to that infinite system.

Here's where my question comes in. If that unprovable but TRUE statement is then included to the already infinite set of facts/axioms/datums, a new unprovable statement is born that is nonetheless TRUE about the system. Ergo, no one can "learn it all." I'm tempted to call it the Harvey theorem ... but Kurt Gödel did beat you to it by about a hundred years.

HarveyH55 wrote:Science is mostly just the best explanation, until somebody comes up with something better.

I have a comment about this statement and you will want to scream "semantics!" when I make it but the word "explanation" is not the word you should be using.

Science does not "explain" why anything is as it is. Science simply states what cause will have what effect or what relationships exist in nature but has nothing to say as to why any of it happens to be the case. There are no explanations in science. The cause simply causes the effect.

This is a sticky point because theories that claim to provide explanations are just unfalsifiable theories, typically speculations of the past, and are specifically not science. Darwin's theory of evolution is a great example. It is, in fact, one possible explanation for the current state of life on planet Earth. However, Christian-hating Marxists err when they refer to the theory as science (Christian-hating Marxists refer to every absurd aspect of their dogma as "science"). Christians who believe in a young earth don't particularly care much for this theory which assumes a much older earth.

Similarly, the Big Bang is one possible, but nonetheless unfalsifiable, explanation of why we have the observable universe that we observe. It is not science.

Don't confuse "explaining nature" with "explaining science." Anyone can explain the falsifiable relationships of science but only unfalsifiable theories can speculate on explanations of nature.

HarveyH55 wrote: Humans are good at making tools.

I tend to qualify this by adding that humans are the only species that produce tools for the purpose of making other tools. There are animals that make tools, by making use of something as a tool, but it is always just one level deep.

I have just heard too many times someone from the "animals are better/smarter/more worthy than humans" crowd that animals are "better" at making tools because with them it's totally natural and instinctive whereas it's totally artificial with humans ... and of course animals don't abuse their skills by creating firearms or oppressive capitalism.

HarveyH55 wrote: Not just tools to perform work, but to also study. Makes it a lot easier to learn things, if you can see clearer. A

... or to hear the audio version if you cannot.

HarveyH55 wrote:lthough, I have some doubts, about the value of gravity wheels...

If what James__ is pursuing works out then he'll have options when he moves to Australia.

.

Describing cause and effect is an explanation.

A theory is an explanatory argument. A theory of science must be falsifiable.
No theory is ever proven True.

Galileo explained why a tossed ball, for example, follows a parabolic curve, using the pull of gravity as a constant. He even measured that constant.

Kepler explained why Mars follows the path that it does, again using the pull of gravity (from the Sun) as a constant.

Newton explained that these two were the same thing, using the Moon to test whether the theory was false.

Out of Newton's explanation came the famous equation, F=mA.

Every theory of science is an explanation of something, and is usually (almost always!) formalized into mathematical form.

The Theory of Evolution is not science. It is not falsifiable.
The Theory of Abiogenesis is not science. It is not falsifiable.
The Theory of Creation is not science. It is not falsifiable.
The Theory of the Big Bang is not science. It is not falsifiable.
The Theory of the Continuum is not science. It is not falsifiable.

The Theory of the Big Bang has a problem. One of logic.

To consider a Universe a point object, expanding into what we see today, that point object has no Universe to exist in. In other words, it is not universal.

A Universe of finite size is also not universal. A parallel Universe means the Universe is not universal.

Therefore, such a 'Universe' is not a universe at all.

If the Theory of Creation is extended to include the creation of the Universe, it faces the same problem. There is no Universe for a Creator to exist in yet, so therefore no such Creator could possibly exist.

The Theory of Creation only states how life arrived on Earth. It does not address anything else in the Universe.

The Theory of Abiogenesis also faces a logic problem:

If, somehow, a cell managed to appear as the result of some random unspecified events, how does it survive? What does it eat? It can't absorb light without complex systems in place. It must each another cell, but there isn't one. Eating another cell is the only it can obtain sufficient resources to divide.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
01-11-2021 02:45
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
Ibdaman wrote
To the best of your scientific acumen, you find no correlation between the weather and the laws of physics? Perhaps this also explains why you think gravity can somehow increase temperature
without additional energy while you nonetheless call other people stupid for making similarly absurd claims.
When have I ever called anyone stupid on this site?That is your go to move
I have never claimed gravity has increased temperature.That is your go to move
01-11-2021 03:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
duncan61 wrote:
Cool fight.How does gravity defy physics?

It doesn't. Your use of gravity as energy defies physics.
duncan61 wrote:
I need to share something.I came on to this forum to glean information as a young hippie chick claimed CO2 from the bad white males was overheating the planet and we are all going to die.I have come into this forum open minded and willing to learn.You and ITN seem to know everything about everything and sometimes you are wrong.

Void argument fallacy.
duncan61 wrote:
Please explain how much you knew about crypto currencies in 2005.

Straw man fallacy. Irrelevant.
duncan61 wrote:
If every other human on the planet wishes to call it fossil fuels get over it.

There is no such thing as a fossil fuel. Fossils don't burn.
duncan61 wrote:
Carbon was formed from organic matter.

WRONG. Carbon is an element. See the periodic table.
duncan61 wrote:
The laws of physics are open to your personal interpretation

No, they are not. You do not need to interpret any theory or it's law (equation).
duncan61 wrote:
and you make them fit.

WRONG. The ONLY authoritative reference of any theory of science is the theory itself.
duncan61 wrote:
At first I discarded that the AGW/CC was political but Greta latest work demonises colonialism and at no point has she ever suggest a solution just demands action.

The action she demands is nothing short of fascism.
duncan61 wrote:
I have watched some good debates recently and the alarmists side always breaks down as nothing has or will happen.

Nope. They always argue for fascist solutions.
duncan61 wrote:
I am rapidly concluding you extreme deniers of everything

No, it is YOU denying science, specifically attempting to say gravity is energy, and attempting to trap energy (you can't).
duncan61 wrote:
are worse than the warmazombies.

No, you are ignoring science and mathematics the same as any warmazombie. You won't get away for laying YOUR problems on others.
duncan61 wrote:
My man at the CCL meeting I went to was honest enough to agree it is a feel good exersize to be an eco champion and climate warrior and boasted about how good it was to meet XYZ politicians.

So for him it's about partying. Gotit. Sure isn't about climate then, is it?
duncan61 wrote:
The guy works from home as a computer programmer and his wife takes the kids to school and does the local shopping so having solar panels at home and an electric car works for them.

Big hairy deal. Unfortunately, twits like that tend to cause mandates for everyone to have solar panels and drive electric cars. See what's happening in the SOTC as they destroy their own economy over exactly that.
duncan61 wrote:
The CCL is their social club.

A rather destructive social club.
duncan61 wrote:
In any debate if it gets emotional like you clearly are and start calling anyone dishonest and a liar breaks the rules of the debate.

There is no debate. Only conversations, despite the name of the forum.
duncan61 wrote:
This site is called climate-debate FFS

Despite the name of the forum.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
01-11-2021 03:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
duncan61 wrote:
Nothing about the term fossil fuels,

There is no such thing as a fossil fuel. Fossils don't burn.
duncan61 wrote:
carbon

is a fuel. It is also an element.
duncan61 wrote:
or the laws of physics

Which you deny.
duncan61 wrote:
which I have just read again and can find no correlation to the weather or climate which has many variables.

Climate has no value. There is no variable. Attempted use of subjective as value.
Weather has no single value. There is no variable. Attempted use of structure as scalar.
duncan61 wrote:
I have never met Pete Rodgers and probably never will.

A lie. You had conversations with him right here on this forum.
duncan61 wrote:
I have shared how gravity makes the air denser at the surface and is a factor in the weather

Gravity is not energy. It does not affect the weather.
duncan61 wrote:
amongst many other things with a lot of people and they get it because it makes sense

You don't get to speak for 'a lot of people'. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy.
duncan61 wrote:
and like many things few people consider this.

You don't get to speak for everyone. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy.
duncan61 wrote:
Fail to understand why it is such a big deal to you.

Because you deny physics. You deny mathematics. You are lying.
duncan61 wrote:
Again you are tacking on the greenhouse and warming stuff.

YOU are tacking on the warming stuff. Inversion fallacy.
duncan61 wrote:
Gravity and the atmosphere just are.Thats it

So you truly want to discard your argument that gravity causes weather, or that gravity makes the Earth warmer? What's it going to be, dude?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
01-11-2021 03:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
duncan61 wrote:
Ibdaman wrote
To the best of your scientific acumen, you find no correlation between the weather and the laws of physics? Perhaps this also explains why you think gravity can somehow increase temperature
without additional energy while you nonetheless call other people stupid for making similarly absurd claims.
When have I ever called anyone stupid on this site?That is your go to move
I have never claimed gravity has increased temperature.That is your go to move


Yes you have. Do you now wish to utterly discard that argument?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
01-11-2021 06:37
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1441)
yes I do
01-11-2021 18:14
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
duncan61 wrote:
yes I do


I will consider the paradox resolved at this time then. IBD should as well, but I can't speak for him, but I am in a position to better defend your points.

It is now taken that your position is that gravity is incapable of increasing the temperature of Earth or changes the weather.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 01-11-2021 18:20
01-11-2021 21:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:yes I do
I will consider the paradox resolved at this time then.

I suppose I will as well ... but you can bet that I am going to expect Duncan to remain consistent with this.

If Duncan continues insulting warmizombies for erroneously blaming CO2 instead of gravity for the increase in earth's temperature ... rather than bashing on their claim of an increase in temperature, I assure you that I will be back in full swing.

Duncan is dishonest in this way. He exclusively bashes on warmizombies for crediting greenhouse gas for the increase in temperature ... not for their claims of an increase in temperature. This is because he actually isn't agreeing to drop his belief in Greenhouse Effect ... but we'll see. I will certainly give him every opportunity. Everybody gets unlimited redos.

What I'll be looking for is whether Duncan avoids focusing on CO2 or greenhouse gas and instead focuses the unsupported claims of a temperature increase on the basis of it violating thermodynamics and/or Stefan-Boltzmann. If he isn't willing to bash warmizombies for their belief in Greenhouse Effect because he believes in it himself then he deserves all the bashing that he gets, and I won't care that he is giving his own belief a different name, i.e. ATE.

However, if he actually has abandoned his silly belief in some global average temperature increase then I'll be right there backing him up. I will gladly join with him ... but I would also expect him to make this point expressly clear to Pete Rogers the next time he pops in just to show that he's not deathly afraid of Pete Rogers for some reason and that he isn't simply regurgitating what Pete Rogers has directed him to write. Obviously that is not any sort of requirement but it's what would be more convincing to me.

In short, sure, I'll extend to him every benefit of any doubt ... but of course I will be scrutinizing what he writes.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-11-2021 22:05
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:yes I do
I will consider the paradox resolved at this time then.

I suppose I will as well ... but you can bet that I am going to expect Duncan to remain consistent with this.

If Duncan continues insulting warmizombies for erroneously blaming CO2 instead of gravity for the increase in earth's temperature ... rather than bashing on their claim of an increase in temperature, I assure you that I will be back in full swing.

Duncan is dishonest in this way. He exclusively bashes on warmizombies for crediting greenhouse gas for the increase in temperature ... not for their claims of an increase in temperature. This is because he actually isn't agreeing to drop his belief in Greenhouse Effect ... but we'll see. I will certainly give him every opportunity. Everybody gets unlimited redos.

What I'll be looking for is whether Duncan avoids focusing on CO2 or greenhouse gas and instead focuses the unsupported claims of a temperature increase on the basis of it violating thermodynamics and/or Stefan-Boltzmann. If he isn't willing to bash warmizombies for their belief in Greenhouse Effect because he believes in it himself then he deserves all the bashing that he gets, and I won't care that he is giving his own belief a different name, i.e. ATE.

However, if he actually has abandoned his silly belief in some global average temperature increase then I'll be right there backing him up. I will gladly join with him ... but I would also expect him to make this point expressly clear to Pete Rogers the next time he pops in just to show that he's not deathly afraid of Pete Rogers for some reason and that he isn't simply regurgitating what Pete Rogers has directed him to write. Obviously that is not any sort of requirement but it's what would be more convincing to me.

In short, sure, I'll extend to him every benefit of any doubt ... but of course I will be scrutinizing what he writes.


.

It is time to put this behind you in the dustbin of irrelevancy.

Duncan has rejected Pete Rogers' argument. The paradox stands resolved. Cease accusations of lying at this time.

I am always on the watch for any paradox. You know this. This paradox stands resolved.
As always, time will tell.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 01-11-2021 22:08
01-11-2021 22:16
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10384)
Into the Night wrote:As always, time will tell.

That is my point. I will be watching. Apparently you missed all the times that I wrote that I was going to give him every benefit of any doubt. You also seem to object to my mentioning his past dishonesty.

I'll tell you what. I won't mention his past dishonesty. I won't mention that I will be scrutinizing what he writes. No mention whatsoever. What has occurred in the past is in the past and the future is yet to come. Naturally, we will see.

I wrote what I wrote so that there won't be any surprises. Now I know that there won't be any. We can press on.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-11-2021 00:41
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16460)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:As always, time will tell.

That is my point. I will be watching. Apparently you missed all the times that I wrote that I was going to give him every benefit of any doubt. You also seem to object to my mentioning his past dishonesty.

I'll tell you what. I won't mention his past dishonesty. I won't mention that I will be scrutinizing what he writes. No mention whatsoever. What has occurred in the past is in the past and the future is yet to come. Naturally, we will see.

I wrote what I wrote so that there won't be any surprises. Now I know that there won't be any. We can press on.

.


Fair and reasonable.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Page 1 of 212>





Join the debate irrational exuberance:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Irrational exuberance2925-04-2020 06:35
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact