Science being crucial to progress in all areas proves whatever this is?
That makes less than zero sense. You just broke numbers.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Irreversible climate damage is imminent
- Thread starter Tupac
- Start date
Science being crucial to progress in all areas proves whatever this is?
That makes less than zero sense. You just broke numbers.
SirMjac28
Patiently Waiting For The Next British Invasion
The very heart of science is a willingness to value ideas only if they are based on evidence and an acceptance of the fact that we are not free to believe whatever we wish to believe. Everything is open to question.
So, career scientists choose ideas to explore, they do their research and if what they get seems valid, they get published. They usually need funding to this. Research costs money, and scientists have to eat, same as the rest of us.
But they need to have been very careful to get to this point. There are hungry sharks out there, in the form of other scientists. If they sense an opportunity to further their own career by testing your work to destruction, they will attempt to do so, especially if they can attract funding in the process. So, you'd better make sure you get your sums right. It's pretty brutal out there.
Some published ideas get tested to destruction and generally fade into obscurity. Others survive the testing process and become accepted as scientifically valid, at least until further evidence to the contrary becomes available.
That's how it works. It's a very powerful process. The results of it have transformed us as a species, and also the world in which we live, in an incredibly short period of time. I'll leave others to reflect on what can be concluded about the current situation in climate change science in the light of this description of its mechanism.
So, career scientists choose ideas to explore, they do their research and if what they get seems valid, they get published. They usually need funding to this. Research costs money, and scientists have to eat, same as the rest of us.
But they need to have been very careful to get to this point. There are hungry sharks out there, in the form of other scientists. If they sense an opportunity to further their own career by testing your work to destruction, they will attempt to do so, especially if they can attract funding in the process. So, you'd better make sure you get your sums right. It's pretty brutal out there.
Some published ideas get tested to destruction and generally fade into obscurity. Others survive the testing process and become accepted as scientifically valid, at least until further evidence to the contrary becomes available.
That's how it works. It's a very powerful process. The results of it have transformed us as a species, and also the world in which we live, in an incredibly short period of time. I'll leave others to reflect on what can be concluded about the current situation in climate change science in the light of this description of its mechanism.
Mankind is a fairly broad spread, you know, of ooohhh about 7 billion people, not everyone with the same habits or concern over their surrounding environment and the impact their actions have on the others who share it.
I have a pedal bike... science doesn't tend to be the best paying career on the planet.
There's plenty that gets mentioned about the impact of air travel and ways to offset the impact of it. Generally folk look for alternatives, sadly there isn't really any for air travel at the moment, so we'd try to offset the impact.
By all means challenge ideas, I don't know any scientist who would disagree with that. The problem is you need to be able to support your claims and have a rational debate. That includes not spitting the dummy out the pram when someone is able to show you evidence which contradicts your claim.
Because it's shades of gray, not black and white, something which you'd typically find in the actual research but that's less interesting and less likely to sell newspapers.
If anything it seems that anti-intellectualism is on the rise.
Of course it does, that's part of science, recording that something has happened and then pursuing follow up experimentation to determine why it happened.
Computational power has come on leaps and bounds in the past 20 years so it's possible to make reasoned projects from model systems with more accuracy now than before.
I predict the sun will rise tomorrow, do I get a medal?
The Earth does not belong to us. We belong to the earth. The Earth is our mother. It is our duty to take care of our mother, not to rape her.
"The future's screams for help are fading away. The world tomorrow, will it die for today?" - Testament, "Into The Pit"
"The future's screams for help are fading away. The world tomorrow, will it die for today?" - Testament, "Into The Pit"
Which leads to scientists being perceived as evil wizards by a dumbed down public.
Unrepresented
Something Borderline Offensive
Luckily there are conspiracy bloggers and talk radio hosts to educate us all as to what scientists really are:
Politicians
Politicians
By "your theories" I meant "the theories you post (and therefor presumably believe)"..
I thought that was implied. I should have been more clear. It was meant as a compliment, though.
I don't actually believe one of the passengers of the recent missing flight was able to hide his phone and send out a photo. If the plane was taken into custody for some ill will mission they would strip search all passengers, anyone not having a phone to confiscate would be suspect and subject to further search and they would probably X ray everyone. The op would not be blown by a stray sell phone.
But I believe it being held on Diego Garcia is more then plausible and will only be disproven by proven air liner debris found in the sea.
GrumpiusMaximus
I've Seen Things You People Wouldn't Believe
No it's not.
A theory is a hypothesis that has been tested and shown to produce predictable results.
What deeptubes is quoting is technically known as 'hogwash'.
Wikipedia said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
Give it a read and educate yourself.
Careful Grumpy...you'll end up on his ignore list.
Another thread where MBP shines through :|
GrumpiusMaximus
I've Seen Things You People Wouldn't Believe
Legal mandates....which are basically laws stating "you must purchase and use "X" product or technology". Would be no different than if some law were passed saying "you must purchase and use "X" bass because I think that bass provides you with sufficient amount of musical enjoyment while not harvesting endangered trees", or whatever. Me either owning or having invested in a company that makes said bass---sweet deal for me. Having gov't confiscate the money of taxpaying workers to help prop up this otherwise unprofitable bass---even better for me.
Add to that the invention of an entirely new market trading "carbon credits" in order to financially punish those who do not want this particular bass---even mo' betta for me.
I'm not against finding different ways to do what we do that are less stressfull on the earth....I'm actually for them. I just highly distrust the motivations of those who are trying to force this particular way of going about it on us. We only get one Earth. Our lifetimes here are but a flash in th pan in the grand scheme of things and we need to leave her in good shape for those that come after us.
In our moden society, there really is no such thing as "green" living. There may be some ways of doing things that are a little (or even a lot) less harmful than others, but short of us all living like Grizzly Adams, none of them are "green".
I guess what upsets me the most is that this whole "green" concept has been reduced to nothing more than a marketing slogan.
If we really wanted to live in harmony with the earth, none of us would be doing the things we do or using the things we use, including me, typing this out on a smartphone, right now..
This is what I'm talking about.
I don't think the 60Hz 120V service coming from your wall outlets has a particular "tone" because of how it's generated. Like coal plants produce a "woody" tone and nuclear plants make electricity that's stale like EMG 81's or something. However we produce the power, it's still the same alternating current - unlike basses.
If that ever becomes an issue then you can write your legislators. Start by going back several decades and telling them you don't want streetcars ripped out, that you want a strong public transportation system, that you don't want to have to buy a car and the gas from the industries that made sure the first two didn't happen.
This has nothing at all to do with the science that clearly says anthropogenic climate change is real and is happening.
