Remember me
▼ Content

The UN Convinced Me


The UN Convinced Me15-09-2019 07:14
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5225)
The time has come for me to apologize to warmizombies. Only now have I come to see the error of my ways. I have been touched by the UN, moved by the passions drawn by this EXISTENTIAL THREAT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hREC4wKVVUs

Words cannot express the sheer emotion that ripped through me as António Guterres read from a script in pure dynamic monotone while even occasionally lifting his head from the paper.

How can I join the Church? I'm sold. We need more taxes. We need more taxes! Existential threats are solved through taxes!


.



.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
15-09-2019 07:44
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1513)
People reading speeches, are usually lying... If you are sincere, and care, you'd only need to glance down at notes, you'd be prepared. School kids stand up, and read out loud, expect a little more from adults, selling something.

Maybe take it easy on the adult 'koolaid', watch the video again in the morning (or early afternoon), when your head clears...
15-09-2019 12:40
spot
★★★★☆
(1227)
If you watch the speaches of Hitler he did not refer to notes.

Just saying.
15-09-2019 18:20
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1513)
spot wrote:
If you watch the speaches of Hitler he did not refer to notes.

Just saying.


But Hitler was also insane, he believed everything he said. To him, it was the truth. The disturbing part, was how easy it was for him to convince so many others, that it was the truth as well. Global Warming is a lie, but some strongly believe it's true, but there seems to be a lot of trouble convincing large groups of people that it's the truth. The UN hasn't found their 'Hitler' yet, or people learned from the past, and tend not to believe the rantings of lunatics anymore.

The people who rely on reading their speeches, either don't fully understand the material, or don't believe in it. The need to read it, to convince themselves, before they vocalize it. This observation doesn't apply to everyone, or every sort of speech, but if you know the individual is comfortable speaking candidly in public, without a script, then you know something is wrong when they are mostly reading out loud, will on camera. There are a few other observation of the speaker, that can indicated deception, like body language; busy hands, poker face, posture. A lot of this stuff is know, and many of them are professional liars. Either use them to advantage, or try to mask them, depending on the audience the wish to deceive. It's a lot to control, all at the same time, something all ways slips by.
15-09-2019 19:10
spot
★★★★☆
(1227)
HarveyH55 wrote:

But Hitler was also insane, he believed everything he said. To him, it was the truth. The disturbing part, was how easy it was for him to convince so many others, that it was the truth as well. Global Warming is a lie, but some strongly believe it's true, but there seems to be a lot of trouble convincing large groups of people that it's the truth. The UN hasn't found their 'Hitler' yet, or people learned from the past, and tend not to believe the rantings of lunatics anymore.

The people who rely on reading their speeches, either don't fully understand the material, or don't believe in it. The need to read it, to convince themselves, before they vocalize it. This observation doesn't apply to everyone, or every sort of speech, but if you know the individual is comfortable speaking candidly in public, without a script, then you know something is wrong when they are mostly reading out loud, will on camera. There are a few other observation of the speaker, that can indicated deception, like body language; busy hands, poker face, posture. A lot of this stuff is know, and many of them are professional liars. Either use them to advantage, or try to mask them, depending on the audience the wish to deceive. It's a lot to control, all at the same time, something all ways slips by.


So if someone looks at their notes you don't trust him. I point out a counter example and you don't trust people who don't look at their notes enough.

Whether Global warming is true or not is not determined by the speaker but by evidence. Something that is lacking for your argument.


IBdaMann wrote:
"Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody.


Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.
15-09-2019 19:26
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1585)
spot wrote:
Whether Global warming is true or not is not determined by the speaker but by evidence.


Well said. The motives, personality, status or authority of the messenger don't make the message true of false. It's a better test to have the least convincing messenger deliver a message anyway.
15-09-2019 19:45
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1513)
spot wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:

But Hitler was also insane, he believed everything he said. To him, it was the truth. The disturbing part, was how easy it was for him to convince so many others, that it was the truth as well. Global Warming is a lie, but some strongly believe it's true, but there seems to be a lot of trouble convincing large groups of people that it's the truth. The UN hasn't found their 'Hitler' yet, or people learned from the past, and tend not to believe the rantings of lunatics anymore.

The people who rely on reading their speeches, either don't fully understand the material, or don't believe in it. The need to read it, to convince themselves, before they vocalize it. This observation doesn't apply to everyone, or every sort of speech, but if you know the individual is comfortable speaking candidly in public, without a script, then you know something is wrong when they are mostly reading out loud, will on camera. There are a few other observation of the speaker, that can indicated deception, like body language; busy hands, poker face, posture. A lot of this stuff is know, and many of them are professional liars. Either use them to advantage, or try to mask them, depending on the audience the wish to deceive. It's a lot to control, all at the same time, something all ways slips by.


So if someone looks at their notes you don't trust him. I point out a counter example and you don't trust people who don't look at their notes enough.

Whether Global warming is true or not is not determined by the speaker but by evidence. Something that is lacking for your argument.


Guess something wrong in your reading comprehension skills... Some one reading their speech, is suspicious, if they claim to be passionate about what they are speaking on. If they claim to believe and care, then it's already something the know, and have confidence in.

I list several other points I use, to determine whether a speaker is being less than truthful.

The Global Warming 'evidence' isn't any better. Al Gore's moving was full of 'evidence' that frozen and reformed, actually many times. The vast plumes of white clouds coming of power plants in the winter, were steam, not pollution, not CO2, and not generally seen in the summer months. I live in Florida, our tourist beaches are important to our economy. We lose some to tropical storms (erosion), but no evidence of rising sea levels.

Basically, all the global warming 'evidence' is talk, and math-magic. In 40 years of global warming, there isn't anything that has continuously gotten worse, year after year, except for those things reported in speeches. We are assure global warming has been progressing for 300 years, but the cumulative effects only exist on papers. We just aren't seeing it out in the actual world. It comes down entirely to faith, what the individual wants to believe. I have faith in my abilities to sort out the facts from the fiction, and who to believe who to take a closer look at.

The speaker might not actually be lying, just not know any better, no confidence, just handed a piece of paper, a script. It rises suspicion to me, and I look for other evidence. Either way, I still put a question mark on the content, until I learn different. I'm not an easy sale, don't pass out faith lightly.
15-09-2019 19:55
spot
★★★★☆
(1227)
The powerplants are burning coal to make the steam. I don't think anyone with a basic knowledge thinks any different. the evidence is the keeling curve, the Ice mass balance the fact that winters are getting milder ect. ect.

The evidence is there. The fact you choose not to accept it and spend your time and energy trying to mislead people is not my problem.
15-09-2019 20:06
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5225)
spot wrote: the evidence is the keeling curve, the Ice mass balance the fact that winters are getting milder ect. ect.

None of that is happening. Just as Hitler was convinced everything he said was true, so do you.

spot wrote:The evidence is there.

The "X-Files" by-line.

spot wrote: The fact you choose not to accept it and spend your time and energy trying to mislead people is not my problem.

It is very much your problem that he isn't joining your religion and validating your personal beliefs.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
15-09-2019 20:52
spot
★★★★☆
(1227)
IBdaMann wrote:

spot wrote:The evidence is there.

The "X-Files" by-line.


No its: "The truth is out there".

Is there nothing that you can get right?


IBdaMann wrote:
"Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody.


Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.
15-09-2019 22:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10253)
tmiddles wrote:
spot wrote:
Whether Global warming is true or not is not determined by the speaker but by evidence.


Well said. The motives, personality, status or authority of the messenger don't make the message true of false.

Then why do you constantly argue the opposite??
tmiddles wrote:
It's a better test to have the least convincing messenger deliver a message anyway.

You are testing the messenger but not the message??!?

You are locked in paradox. Which is it, dude?


The Parrot Killer
15-09-2019 22:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10253)
spot wrote:
The powerplants are burning coal to make the steam. I don't think anyone with a basic knowledge thinks any different.

Generally true.
spot wrote:
the evidence is the keeling curve,

The Keeling curve is a proper noun. It is capitalized. It has no relation to steam.
spot wrote:
the Ice mass balance

Not measurable.
spot wrote:
the fact that winters are getting milder ect. ect.

Not measurable.
spot wrote:
The evidence is there.

What evidence?
* You cannot measure the temperature of the Earth. There are not enough thermometers.
* You cannot measure the amount of snow and ice on Earth. There is no instrumentation for it.
spot wrote:
The fact you choose not to accept it and spend your time and energy trying to mislead people is not my problem.

It is YOU trying to mislead people. You are denying statistical mathematics to support your religion.


The Parrot Killer
16-09-2019 01:15
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5225)
spot wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:

spot wrote:The evidence is there.

The "X-Files" by-line.


No its: "The truth is out there".

Is there nothing that you can get right?

Thank you for making my point.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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




Join the debate The UN Convinced Me:

Remember me

▲ 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 © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact