- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What are your reasons for believing climate change is "a hoax"
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:46 pm to Powerman
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:46 pm to Powerman
quote:
In my scenario they didn't recommend any specific plans. They just recommend that you contribute to a tax advantaged retirement plan with no other specifics. I'm no financial expert but that would probably be pretty sound advice.
Interestingly, finance is my game.
quote:
But are you really ignorant if you took the time to consult dozens of experts on the topic? You are using people with less ignorance on the topic than you to make a more informed decision are you not?
When I ask for the opinions of 5 plumbers and go with the angle 4 agreed on, I'm admitting that on plumbing, I'm an ignorant frick.
I'm not claiming to KNOW that the 4 are right, because actually, I don't KNOW it. Thanks for the analogy.
quote:Dude. Your walking naked in the courtyard and I'm just throwing tomatoes at you at this point.
It's clear that you are unwilling to open your mind on the matter. I'll grant you that.
1
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:48 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Interestingly, finance is my game.
Great
quote:
When I ask for the opinions of 5 plumbers and go with the angle 4 agreed on, I'm admitting that on plumbing, I'm an ignorant frick.
Which is fine. It's ok to consult experts on things that you don't know.
quote:
I'm not claiming to KNOW that the 4 are right, because actually, I don't KNOW it. Thanks for the analogy.
But if you are making a decision on the matter you're likely going to go with the majority decision right? A more appropriate analogy would include a much larger sample size than 5 by the way.
quote:
Dude. Your walking naked in the courtyard and I'm just throwing tomatoes at you at this point.
You're no climate scientist either. So you're the naked guy throwing tomatoes at the naked guy.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:51 pm to Powerman
quote:
But if you are making a decision on the matter you're likely going to go with the majority decision right? A more appropriate analogy would include a much larger sample size than 5 by the way
Yup.
I would want more.
And, if along the way, I discovered that for some odd reason, solving the problem using method A made the plumbers far more money than solving it using method B......I might start to re-examine my confidence in the A recommendation............even if 10,000 gave it to me.
This is fun.
You realize, they call this a logical fallacy precisely because there's literally no way to example your way out of it, right?
But go ahead. This is fun.
quote:Agreed. Which is why ZERO of my arguments for my concerns have been science based.
You're no climate scientist either. So you're the naked guy throwing tomatoes at the naked guy
Fascinating how that works huh.
Come back bro. This is just becoming target practice at this point.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:52 pm to Powerman
quote:No you aren’t. Because it’s kinda obvious the field’s leading “experts” are politically and financially driven and have a poor record when it comes to quality modeling and data manipulation.
I'm asking why people would believe something that is in contradiction with the experts on the matter
You’ve made up the false premise that “it’s only political (if they are conservative)”. If you’re asking others to explain your imaginary premise... you’re going to be doomed to disappointment.
quote:Only if you ignore the contents of this thread.
So far it looks as if I'm right
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:54 pm to Taxing Authority
I'm kinda glad Pman came back.
Talk about a guy willing to take a complete rhetorical shite kicking and come back for more!
Talk about a guy willing to take a complete rhetorical shite kicking and come back for more!
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:54 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
ZERO of my arguments for my concerns have been science based.
quote:
This is just becoming target practice at this point.
Indeed.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:54 pm to Powerman
quote:
Here are your options
You can believe
A. What the overwhelming majority of experts claim
of you can believe
B. Option A is at odds with my political affiliation and I've been told by like minded people it's a conspiracy so I reject is as such
why are these the only two options? Curiously, you don’t list “learn the f*cking science” as a rational option. That’s telling.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:55 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Indeed.
Hey Pman. Ya got Wild on your side.
I mean..........did someone mention burger flippers or what!
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:56 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
why are these the only two options?
Then....he literally argues that attempting to evaluate and form your own opinions is an example of stupidity.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:56 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
And guess what. I don't know him.
clearly. But it’s illustratrative to those that say “there’s no financial incentive for being a climate change proponent”. There absolutely is. There is nothing magically clean about government’s money. This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:59 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Then....he literally argues that attempting to evaluate and form your own opinions is an example of stupidity.
I can't wait for his next appeal to authority example that he thinks will be the coup de gras.
I used to think Pman was some young college kid attempting to practice his rhetoric
But, that was like 6-7 years ago.
Now, I realize he's just a fairly pedestrian intellect who thinks agreeing with smart people makes him smart.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:59 pm to Powerman
quote:Neither are rational. There is no answer because you’ve set the hypothetical up to be that way. It’s inane.
But of the 2 which seems more rational? And why is it so difficult to answer?
Posted on 3/7/18 at 1:59 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Curiously, you don’t list “learn the f*cking science” as a rational option. That’s telling.
Burger flipping is challenging enough
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:00 pm to Powerman
quote:
Powerman
I see you've wandered down the rabbit hole of a poli board climate debate. Godspeed man.
This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:00 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Neither are rational. There is no answer because you’ve set the hypothetical up to be that way. It’s inane.
It's fun when people use a rhetorical approach that they seem to think is unique that everyone else has already seen.
It's like when your 16 year old tries sneaky shite you did when you were 16 and then is stunned to discover you're aware of their game.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:01 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Hey Pman. Ya got Wild on your side.
At that point, it’s just time to back away and quit.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:01 pm to TejasHorn
quote:That would imply Pman has been debating.
I see you've wandered down the rabbit hole of a poli board climate debate. Godspeed man.
Nope. Just counting.
I mean, Spidey debated. Sure, he used cut and paste shite from climate sites to do it.....but he debated.
Pman is just going with.........."well, more people........"
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:04 pm to CFDoc
quote:Yup. Too sensitive to inputs, poorly controlled residuals, inaccurate geometry and non-fidelity to state variables.
Because I understand, from the technical, political, and financial perspective, exactly how the experts have reached their conclusions.
The state of our current tools for stochastic modeling, statistical inference, and non-linear partial differential equation solving are such that an argument can be made for, or against, man made climate change. In both cases, the argument can follow strict mathematical laws and the result can state either case precisely.
Which to powerman means “they are conservatives”.
What he doesn’t realize is many like myself once “believed” in it. It sounds reasonable. The you start digging in and.... there are serious technical problems with theory and the work of those promoting it.
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:04 pm to TejasHorn
quote:
see you've wandered down the rabbit hole of a poli board climate debate.
There's no such thing. It's either "it's all fake" or "OMG WERE ALL GONNA DIE"
Posted on 3/7/18 at 2:05 pm to Powerman
quote:
Would this standard of proof not be acceptable to you?
Brittany Spears was once quite popular. Are you going to go with “she’s an amazing musician”? quote:I’d wager the percentage of catholic priests that believe in doG is higher than 97%. Do you believe that priest’s faith proves the existence of doG?
If 97% of climate scientists think that man made climate change is real is that standard of proof too low for you?
This post was edited on 3/7/18 at 2:07 pm
Page 26 of 40
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News