| Pages:
1
2 |
Osprey
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3694
Registered: 5-23-2004
Location: Baja Ca. Sur
Member Is Offline
|
|
Please Drop the Labels
Let me try again to get rid of the labelling. Doomsdayers versus Deniers. It has come to that. Short, catchy, compelling slogans have driven a huge
wedge between really smart people who should be able to avoid linguistic traps. Smart people usually don’t bother to untangle buckets full of bits and
pieces of facts and conjectures about anything so subjective as the weather/warming and its vicissitude’s.
I’m not one of the smart ones so I have no fear. Let’s see if we can agree on some things the two rivals have in common: both sides have seen reports,
charts, graphs, videos, symposiums, presenting all sides of climate/warming controversies and paid proper attention to each of them as they had the
time. Some of the information leaning toward nature, not man’s causation makes sense to even the most rabid Doomer while the same is true for Deniers;
they dismiss some reports they don’t find convincing but they can’t really ague with some that show theory projections to be on target.
Each of the smart combatants have the latitude to choose to believe some areas of the hundreds of scientific specialty/division summaries and
projections and they can also just as easily dismiss what doesn’t jell with other credible or empirical evidence they believe in.
THERE’S NO SLOGAN FOR THAT. The peanut gallery hasn’t studied anything, ever, but they scream the loudest in derision and shout the slogans over and
over to stir the pot.
This is a universe more complex than doing the blindmen and the elephant thing here. Literally millions of people have studied the various forces of
man and nature that are in question; that’s because there are so many systems in play, so many movements in an ever-changing puzzle. Some things seem
to change in a wink while the keenest minds must strain to make sense of things that change when only measured by the passing of millions of years.
Are you so intractable that you would endorse and own every scientific study that upholds your view? Are you so dead set on being right about your
opinions that nothing could change them? Do you like representing the label?
Maybe it’s the herd thing at work here; perhaps one on one over a couple of beers you might be less willing to argue every point.
Drop the labels. You both can’t be 100% right.
|
|
|
Udo
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6364
Registered: 4-26-2008
Location: Black Hills, SD/Ensenada/San Felipe
Member Is Offline
Mood: TEQUILA!
|
|
I am seldom 100% right.
I am open to listening and will seldom contradict someone.
I feel good enough to know I am right, without having to prove someone wrong.
Thanks for the reminder, Jorge!
Udo
Youth is wasted on the young!
|
|
|
AKgringo
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6189
Registered: 9-20-2014
Location: Anchorage, AK (no mas!)
Member Is Offline
Mood: Retireded
|
|
I also have some opinions about the 'facts' that have been thrown back and forth over the many posts that this topic always generates. My opinions
are not based on a formal education and research I have done, but on a lifetime of interest in, and observation of the various theory's put forth.
Due to my training in Avalanche control and rescue, I have an above average knowledge about how ice affects, and is affected by the climate,
particularly in northern lattitudes. I have not contributed any of my observations and personal knowledge to these threads for two reasons;
1...Stirring the pot will not change any beliefs held by the readers here
2...It has nothing to do with sharing the enjoyment of Baja
Edit; Thanks Osprey for so eloquently stating what I have wanted to say for a while!
[Edited on 2-26-2016 by AKgringo]
If you are not living on the edge, you are taking up too much space!
"Could do better if he tried!" Report card comments from most of my grade school teachers. Sadly, still true!
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
Deniers, Doomsday and Delusions
The problem with the (newly-created) popular definition of denier is that it already exists as a term for measuring fiber density.
As in sheets.
More importantly, it is easily confused with Diener.
Leading one to assume you think that he's working in a Morgue.
[Edited on 2-27-2016 by MrBillM]
|
|
|
pauldavidmena
Super Nomad
Posts: 1742
Registered: 5-23-2013
Location: Centerville, MA, USA
Member Is Offline
|
|
I'm always right. Years ago, I thought I had made a mistake, but I was wrong.
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4431
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
also Diener (German) = butler
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
sancho
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 2524
Registered: 10-6-2004
Location: OC So Cal
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Osprey  |
Are you so intractable that you would endorse and own every scientific study that upholds your view? Are you so dead set on being right about your
opinions that nothing could change them?
|
As you said, SCIENTIFIC study's, try as I might, it is hard to
get around virtually every group's findings, NOAA, NASA, CalTech,
Woods Hole, Scripps, that's enough for starters. Others like
to rely on their gut feelings, it generally has something to
do with the conservative political lean. I like having my mind
changed, I just never get a half way decent rebuttal. Example,
the most prolific poster here, wants to see a pier piling from
'50 to show the lack of sea level rise, this change happens in decades, not 2 yrs. That is how simplistic/ basic a
few here are. I'll stick with science. This topic has been
repeated WAY too much. Jorge this is beneath your usual
contribution, look forward to the next
[Edited on 2-26-2016 by sancho]
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4431
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
why would one drop labels?
for example Democrats vs Republicans
both groups are presented with identical facts
and it still makes my head spin how the Dem or Rep followers argue for their decision by picking "their" facts
same thing about (man made) climate change, though a lot more complicated
some want to believe, we are killing our planet, others see changes but don't feel any responsibility
if I can not label the 2 parties - then what?
and Blondes? Can't call them blond any longer?
I think labels are just fine. As long as we keep talking to each other and behave as civil as possible. We may have to rediscover respect.
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
durrelllrobert
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7393
Registered: 11-22-2007
Location: Punta Banda BC
Member Is Offline
Mood: thriving in Baja
|
|
"Each of the smart combatants have the latitude to choose to believe some areas of the hundreds of scientific specialty/division summaries and
projections and they can also just as easily dismiss what doesn’t jell with other credible or empirical evidence they believe in.
THERE’S NO SLOGAN FOR THAT."
_________________________________________________________
My new slogan will be FMDIDGAF (as Reth Butler stated in Gone With the Wind, sorta)
Bob Durrell
|
|
|
bajabuddha
Banned
Posts: 4024
Registered: 4-12-2013
Location: Baja New Mexico
Member Is Offline
Mood: Always cranky unless medicated
|
|
I am unfortunately familiar with the thread you're referring to. I refuse to post even when I think I have a relevant contribution any more. I'll
check in occasionally to see where the redundancy has devolved to. I just can't believe the OP would re-start such an a$$inine topic to begin with on
BN. It creates its' own Global Warming with the amount of methane produced in it.
Takes the chill off my martini, and the flavor out of the olives. 
I don't have a BUCKET LIST, but I do have a F***- IT LIST a mile long!
86 - 45*
|
|
|
woody with a view
PITA Nomad
Posts: 15939
Registered: 11-8-2004
Location: Looking at the Coronado Islands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Everchangin'
|
|
their are always three sides to every point of view. yours, mine and reality!
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 19769
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Osprey | Let me try again to get rid of the labelling. Doomsdayers versus Deniers. It has come to that. Short, catchy, compelling slogans have driven a huge
wedge between really smart people who should be able to avoid linguistic traps. Smart people usually don’t bother to untangle buckets full of bits and
pieces of facts and conjectures about anything so subjective as the weather/warming and its vicissitude’s.
I’m not one of the smart ones so I have no fear. Let’s see if we can agree on some things the two rivals have in common: both sides have seen reports,
charts, graphs, videos, symposiums, presenting all sides of climate/warming controversies and paid proper attention to each of them as they had the
time. Some of the information leaning toward nature, not man’s causation makes sense to even the most rabid Doomer while the same is true for Deniers;
they dismiss some reports they don’t find convincing but they can’t really ague with some that show theory projections to be on target.
Each of the smart combatants have the latitude to choose to believe some areas of the hundreds of scientific specialty/division summaries and
projections and they can also just as easily dismiss what doesn’t jell with other credible or empirical evidence they believe in.
THERE’S NO SLOGAN FOR THAT. The peanut gallery hasn’t studied anything, ever, but they scream the loudest in derision and shout the slogans over and
over to stir the pot.
This is a universe more complex than doing the blindmen and the elephant thing here. Literally millions of people have studied the various forces of
man and nature that are in question; that’s because there are so many systems in play, so many movements in an ever-changing puzzle. Some things seem
to change in a wink while the keenest minds must strain to make sense of things that change when only measured by the passing of millions of years.
Are you so intractable that you would endorse and own every scientific study that upholds your view? Are you so dead set on being right about your
opinions that nothing could change them? Do you like representing the label?
Maybe it’s the herd thing at work here; perhaps one on one over a couple of beers you might be less willing to argue every point.
Drop the labels. You both can’t be 100% right.
|
You are a fool. The deniers have very little credibility, and grasp at straw to build the pathetic arguments they put forth.
Strong names and labels are perfect for describing the right wing in the USA - they are selfish bigots and nothing more.
The rest of the world understands the issues(s). Only the USA right wingnuts persist with their delusions and lies.
|
|
|
AKgringo
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6189
Registered: 9-20-2014
Location: Anchorage, AK (no mas!)
Member Is Offline
Mood: Retireded
|
|
'Labelers' are so judgmental, consider me a 'Dropper'!
If you are not living on the edge, you are taking up too much space!
"Could do better if he tried!" Report card comments from most of my grade school teachers. Sadly, still true!
|
|
|
bajacamper
Nomad
Posts: 113
Registered: 2-21-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666 | | Quote: Originally posted by Osprey | Let me try again to get rid of the labelling. Doomsdayers versus Deniers. It has come to that. Short, catchy, compelling slogans have driven a huge
wedge between really smart people who should be able to avoid linguistic traps. Smart people usually don’t bother to untangle buckets full of bits and
pieces of facts and conjectures about anything so subjective as the weather/warming and its vicissitude’s.
I’m not one of the smart ones so I have no fear. Let’s see if we can agree on some things the two rivals have in common: both sides have seen reports,
charts, graphs, videos, symposiums, presenting all sides of climate/warming controversies and paid proper attention to each of them as they had the
time. Some of the information leaning toward nature, not man’s causation makes sense to even the most rabid Doomer while the same is true for Deniers;
they dismiss some reports they don’t find convincing but they can’t really ague with some that show theory projections to be on target.
Each of the smart combatants have the latitude to choose to believe some areas of the hundreds of scientific specialty/division summaries and
projections and they can also just as easily dismiss what doesn’t jell with other credible or empirical evidence they believe in.
THERE’S NO SLOGAN FOR THAT. The peanut gallery hasn’t studied anything, ever, but they scream the loudest in derision and shout the slogans over and
over to stir the pot.
This is a universe more complex than doing the blindmen and the elephant thing here. Literally millions of people have studied the various forces of
man and nature that are in question; that’s because there are so many systems in play, so many movements in an ever-changing puzzle. Some things seem
to change in a wink while the keenest minds must strain to make sense of things that change when only measured by the passing of millions of years.
Are you so intractable that you would endorse and own every scientific study that upholds your view? Are you so dead set on being right about your
opinions that nothing could change them? Do you like representing the label?
Maybe it’s the herd thing at work here; perhaps one on one over a couple of beers you might be less willing to argue every point.
Drop the labels. You both can’t be 100% right.
|
You are a fool. The deniers have very little credibility, and grasp at straw to build the pathetic arguments they put forth.
Strong names and labels are perfect for describing the right wing in the USA - they are selfish bigots and nothing more.
The rest of the world understands the issues(s). Only the USA right wingnuts persist with their delusions and lies. |
Who is more the fool, one willing to consider all aspects or one jumping immediately to name calling?
|
|
|
seaker236
Newbie
Posts: 6
Registered: 2-4-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
I'm mostly a believer but I will examine other ideas, found this interesting, though probably the wrong place for it
http://www.eebmike.com/ice.pdf
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4431
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
it seems like there is strong support for science here - at least verbally
but it also seems like nobody looks at the papers offered by various members
otherwise there would have been comments on the papers
instead the comments are personal
strange science
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
LABELS
As Will once sagely said:
"A Turd by any other name would still smell the same ."
More or Less.
|
|
|
Whale-ista
Super Nomad
Posts: 2009
Registered: 2-18-2013
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sunny with chance of whales
|
|
thanks Udo- nicely put.
People can disagree without being disagreeable.
| Quote: Originally posted by Udo | I am seldom 100% right.
I am open to listening and will seldom contradict someone.
I feel good enough to know I am right, without having to prove someone wrong.
Thanks for the reminder, Jorge! |
\"Probably the airplanes will bring week-enders from Los Angeles before long, and the beautiful poor bedraggled old town will bloom with a
Floridian ugliness.\" (John Steinbeck, 1940, discussing the future of La Paz, BCS, Mexico)
|
|
|
woody with a view
PITA Nomad
Posts: 15939
Registered: 11-8-2004
Location: Looking at the Coronado Islands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Everchangin'
|
|
if 80% of the time you could be right or get 80% of what you wanted, wouldn't that be called a win?
think about it......
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 65257
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Udo | I am seldom 100% right.
I am open to listening and will seldom contradict someone.
I feel good enough to know I am right, without having to prove someone wrong.
Thanks for the reminder, Jorge! |
I am also with Udo on this!
Some people think I am for something or 'pushing' something (if it doesn't agree with their view) when I am often simply posting another side of the
debate or what I see as evidence of the other side, and never saying anyone must believe what I believe.
I think that my 'opposing' replies cause extra angst with some because the evidence often so clearly refutes their beliefs. They post Point A and I
reply with Point B. Now, instead of just leaving the two 'Points' alone... they come back and say I am wrong, Point B is wrong, or begin name
calling!??
Of course, after they reply with Point A-2, then it usually gets me to reply with Point B-2... and the back and forth goes on. Neither the Point A
folks or the Point B folks change each others' minds, so it seems?
It is good for Baja Nomad, however... as the more activity, the more chances someone will click a banner ad here and that supports keeping Baja Nomad
online!
In the end, this is entertainment and can be educational!
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
