starting strength gym
Page 31 of 47 FirstFirst ... 21293031323341 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 464

Thread: Commentary #6: Global Warming

  1. #301
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    86

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Indeed, Michael Mann is a genuine piece of shit: Amazon.com Michael E Mann: A Disgrace to the Profession
    After reading "the Hockey stick Illusion" my largest, rage inducing takeaway about all this was that the data was not made publicly available. For a second forget the scientific method - this asshole was funded by our money, works for a university funded by our money, and therefore his 'research' should be public domain. Every American should have full access to it, the raw dataset, and the code - full stop.

    The institutionalization of science and research is playing out just like it did in Atlas Shrugged. Every time I re-read that book every five years or so the parallels to all our current problems are just right there, laid out in a work of fiction from like 60 years ago. Anyone looking can see it playing out in climate science the last 30 years or so, and more recently we have been on the receiving end from pharma / HHS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    What I don't understand about this whole thing is, if it's all a load of bullshit, why would a majority of climate scientists across the world more-or-less agree on it? If we were talking only about American scientists, or even just US, UK, and EU folks, then sure, whatever. All our governments get together and decide a bunch of bullshit that has no basis in science, and decide to start giving grants preferentially to people who will toe the party line, and that creates a self-reinforcing cycle of bullshit where questioning the holy scripture of climate change becomes a career ender. That I would buy.
    On the bolded part you have both asked and answered your question. The governments of the world are playing the long game waiting for the current generation of tenured researchers that question the science to die out. The incoming crop will be fully indoctrinated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    Nobody here is a climatologist, which means we're all stepping out of our lane, trying to argue about a topic we're not qualified to discuss. Every damn thing under the sun is more complicated when you dive into it than it seems at first; I don't see why the climate would be any different.
    This is the logical fallacy of 'credentialism.'

    Here's the thing: no one should be making policy off these predictions. The historical record of the last 20 years shows that even the climate scientists most conservative (to them) predictions largely miss the mark and do not reflect what is happening on the planet. They are at best tools to learn and improve said models so one day they converge with reality. In no way should we be basing policy off of FAILED predictive models.

  2. #302
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    80

    Default

    Money from where? You really think that an entire profession up and agreed to sell out their integrity? And how would that work? Does the dean take all climatology grad students into the back room and tell them, "Listen, folks, I know you entered this field because you wanted to save the world from climate change. But the truth is, we're all on the take here. You can agree to the lie, or you can change careers, but you can't have both." And this is happening all over the world, and everyone is just agreeing to it? Well, not everyone, but the majority of them.

    Then there are the governments. Xi Jinping pledged to make China carbon neutral by whenever. Is he on the hook, too? What about Iran and Russia? If any place can be trusted to disagree with western policy it's Russia, but they've also pledged to reduce carbon emissions. And selling oil is a significant portion of their economy.

    And where is this money coming from? The global oil market is worth about 1.7 trillion US -- does the climate change cabal have more than this?

    On the flip side, let's consider American politics. Anything one side proposes, the other side opposes. It's been that way for decades. Climate change is a politically charged issue in the US. You can basically tell which party a person votes for based on whether they agree with "carbon reduction" policies. (imo "carbon reduction" is a weasel phrase with little actual meaning but that's beside the point.) (I never vote a straight ticket, which may be slightly less beside the point.)

    Is it more likely that there's a global plot to cover up the truth, which the majority of a single profession in every nation has agreed to join even though it means abandoning their integrity, and they also got every major world government on board, and the conspiracy's funding is larger than Switzerland's GDP? Or is it more likely that we think what we do about climate change because we live inside of a political system and media environment which turns every major policy issue into a radically divisive culture war?

    For what it's worth I do think that the left has gone absolutely batshit over the issue. There's a middle ground between "it's all bullshit" and "the sky is falling."

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,367

    Default

    How old are you, Oberon?

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    2,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    Money from where? You really think that an entire profession up and agreed to sell out their integrity? And how would that work? Does the dean take all climatology grad students into the back room and tell them, "Listen, folks, I know you entered this field because you wanted to save the world from climate change. But the truth is, we're all on the take here. You can agree to the lie, or you can change careers, but you can't have both." And this is happening all over the world, and everyone is just agreeing to it? Well, not everyone, but the majority of them.
    Climatology is not a real science. It was created specifically to push propaganda.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    Climatology is not a real science. It was created specifically to push propaganda.
    Absolutely. Name another "Science" whose predictive ability is based entirely on computer models.

    And there's also this: Why Research Fraud Is Getting Worse — The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal

  6. #306
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    How old are you, Oberon?
    45, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    Climatology is not a real science. It was created specifically to push propaganda.
    Citation Needed. Even if it's true, imagine yourself as an eager young climatologist, ready to contribute to the future of humanity. (I think we can agree that nobody would go into climatology unless they were a true believer.) Eventually, some day, you find out that it's all a scam. You've wasted your money and time. The people you respected and admired were lying to you, either for political or financial purposes. How would you react?

    Now imagine this is happening to everyone in the field, in every university on earth, and has been for several decades. Yet somehow, only a tiny percentage of them decide to come clean. The rest of them abandon their dreams of being a force for good and sell out to Big Climate.

    That's essentially what you're proposing, and I have a really hard time believing it. Much more likely is that global temperatures are in fact rising, that human behavior contributes to it in some way, that climate scientists are more or less staying sort of-kind of close to the truth, and that self-selecting nature of climatologists (i.e. fanatics who have decided to devote themselves to fighting climate change) leads to a culture where exaggerating results is accepted/encouraged in varying degrees, and preaching loudly about the evils of driving to work every day gets you approval from your peers. (Put a pin in the preaching thing.) People will do things for approval that they would never do for money, and this model of climatology dishonesty doesn't require a belief in a global conspiracy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Absolutely. Name another "Science" whose predictive ability is based entirely on computer models.
    Agreed 100%. Take even one computer programming class, then come back and tell me how much you trust computer models. Garbage in, garbage out.

    My primary issue with climate scientists is that they overstep their bounds. Science is the process of discovering true facts about the universe. It is (and should remain) descriptive. But climate scientists don't do that. They are consistently prescriptive. They want to tell us what to do, and if we don't do it we're monsters who are killing the planet. (And they wrote a computer program that agrees with them. Wow, go figure, a computer did what you told it to.) Y'all seem to think this is about control, or money, or a global conspiracy or whatever. (It's definitely partly about money, but what isn't? A researcher at Schlumberger makes double or triple what an academic researcher makes, and that's straight out of grad school.) I think it's just a bunch of people who are infected with the very common need to feel like they're championing a righteous cause. Shitty people have always found ways to make a living being morally superior.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Research fraud is a huge issue in every academic field. It's an open secret. You can't expect to get published in any leading journal if you're not willing to fudge your results to please the review board. This often includes adding citations to papers written by a member of the board. Having your papers cited (I know you know this, Rip) is the academic's popularity contest, so if you can force people to cite you it artificially inflates your prestige. It's all very Mean Girls.

  7. #307
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,310

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    Climatology is not a real science. It was created specifically to push propaganda.
    More precisely, it is propaganda.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    How old are you, Oberon?
    I don't think Oberon's skepticism of the money explanation is unwarranted. I'm reminded of the seemingly insane words of a mother on twitter whose son died because of vaxx-related heart issues. After another mother expressed concern about giving the vaxx to her own kid, the first mother refused to influence against group consensus and said she had no regrets about vaccinating her son, but just wished she would have much more closely monitored potential heart issues. Money did not make that women come to such a self-destructive conclusion, nor did the raw commands of authority. The masses are often very anti-authority if they perceive the social consensus is anti-authority on a given issue. Just look at the almost universal support of the BLM riots at the height of the 2020 psyop, as an example.

    The lynch pin to all of this is the media and their manufactured consensus. They might spiral into it occasionally ("mask off" moments), but the media almost never just demands you do something because they said so. They convince you that everyone around you is doing it, and that you will be an outcast if you don't do the same. A lot of podcasts and independent commentators started to hone in on this stuff during and after all the COVID insanity. Of course, as with most issues, the dissident right was well ahead of the curve. Back in 2018, one of my favorite video essayist working under pseudonym Devon Stack of Black Pilled fame analyzed the phenomenon extremely well in these two videos:

    How YOU Can Crack the Conformity (9m 41s)

    Groupthink and Why They NEED to Censor Us (6m 47s)

    Excerpt transcribed from second video:

    Late night talk shows are very popular with these kinds of people, because they supply instant feedback from the group. They are given audible cues that inform them of the group's position on popular topics, and whether or not they should approve or disapprove of this person or that person, in the form of cheers, applause, and laughter. Television studios became aware of this psychological trick, and the need the average person had to be given this feedback, before they could comfortably respond to jokes. And that led them to insert artificial laughter into most citcoms, which later evolved into cutting to reaction shots in shows that didn't have a laugh track, like NBC's The Office. It is these visual and auditory cues that communicate to people where the group stands, and therefore what to conform to in order to ensure your survival within the group. This is precisely why corporate political propaganda employs these same tactics.

    ...

    If you doubt what I'm saying, I'll give you a perfect example of this programming. After her defeat in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton blamed James Comey for her loss. The propaganda ministers spun into high gear and began programming their audiences into disliking James Comey. The programming was so effective that when Stephen Colbert announces to his audience some months later that President Trump had fired Comey, many in the audience cheered.

    This was not the correct response, and Colbert immediately rebuked them, and wasted no time in communicating that the group now liked James Comey. The audience both in the studio and at home obediently accepted the new programming, and that programming will persist until such a time that the narrative changes, in which case the audience will be reprogrammed once again.

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    Money from where? You really think that an entire profession up and agreed to sell out their integrity? And how would that work?
    Yes. For how it would work, see the response to Covid from 2020-current.

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    535

    Default

    Edited to add: The whole "you really believe everyone from academia to the government to scientists are in on a big conspiracy" line of rhetoric no longer works, because we literally just watched it happen in real-time with Covid.

    Yes, we *really* think that, because we watched it happen.

    Coincidentally, the *exact same people* who pushed the Covid nonsense are also pushing the carbon nonsense.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Northern Territory, Australia
    Posts
    169

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Money, my child.
    Which is the same reason a majority of nutritionists agree that the food pyramid is the solution to obesity and the majority of cardiologists agree that LDL cholesterol causes heart disease.

Page 31 of 47 FirstFirst ... 21293031323341 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •