Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score 1) 709

So you have no ability or interest in having a substantive discussion and thus any presumed intellectual superiority or integrity presumed on your part is invalid.

You just want to shit sling. Which is fine. Just know that you're seen for what you are... you were given every opportunity to be better than that... you failed.

Comment Re:Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score -1, Redundant) 709

Quote my initial statement please. You say I am goal post moving... but if you look at what I was saying you'll see that you cannot put me in that box. Sorry, sport.

My position was from the beginning an answer to someone as to why people would be so emotionally, ideologically, and even morally invested in a matter despite being unhorsed on so many of the core precepts.

My answer was thus a response to why a PERSON would hold a position such as that despite being proven wrong repeatedly.

We are discussing politics, psychology, morality, sociology...

if you want to have a discussion about AGW... we can do that too... but my argument was on the state of mind of people rather than on AGW or GW itself. This is quite obvious by looking at my original post.

So do you want to discuss my original point or do YOU want to goal post move or change the subject and argue something else? Because I can do that if you want... but do not presume that unwillingness to change the subject was somehow intellectual dishonesty when in fact it would YOU that is dishonest by implying my context was other than what it obviously was...

Friendo, this line of rhetoric out of you does nothing to unseat my position or grant you any kind of intellectual high ground.

Comment Re:are you knowledgable on ANYTHING? (Score 1) 709

More baseless insults... you really unseated my position on a complex scientific and sociological issue with your baseless insults here... I mean... wow. /s

In the future, have a thought in your head before you presume to enter a discussion more complex than what mouth breathers like yourself typically discuss. Nothing you are saying here is doing anything to make you sound even remotely rational or educated or mature enough to even participate.

Comment Re:are you knowledgable on ANYTHING? (Score 1) 709

Well, sadly making any kind of coherent point, you don't have a coherent point. So... there you are... making baseless insults in a childish attempt to sound superior... and it just... sounds childish.

Not really the way to wound me, brother. Try harder. Or be ineffective on top of being childish. Up to you.

Comment Re:Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score 0) 709

Ad hominem is ad hominem is ad hominem. Who said what is not material to an argument unless that person is personally relevant to the issue... and since no person will be relevant to an issue of global climate I don't really care who said what so much as what was said.

In any case... we can engage on the issue if you want. Lets go through it. What do you think I have to prove? All I'm arguing at this point is political contamination which is self evident... but I'm happy to provide evidence of such if you're really determined to question the existence of the sun in the sky.

Comment Re:are you knowledgable on ANYTHING? (Score 1) 709

In what way am I being an idiot if I'm saying something you agree with?

Be specific please... I rather suspect you're attempting to "frenemy" here (Friend-Enemy)... claiming you agree when you don't to gain a rhetorical advantage. Just my assumption based on the contradictions inherent in your own statement.

You say I'm preaching to the choir... okay... so you agree with me by your statement... but I'm such an idiot that you think I should be downvoted... Cite the stupid thing I said that lead you to make that statement?

Comment Re:Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score 0) 709

Being American doesn't really matter when the fee fees of people all over the world got involved, David.

The long and the short of it is that there are attempts by alarmists to exaggerate the issue beyond the evidence of science to push policy objectives for political reasons.

When that happens, the science is corrupted because it becomes politics and not science. The price of mixing politics with science is that you just have politics. Its like mixing shit with ice cream. You just have shit now. No one is eating that unless they want to eat shit. And I don't want to eat shit, David.

Now if you want to talk about this in an unshitted version... we can do that. But the consensus argument has been widely debunked as politics. And so have the extreme consequence predictions. What we have left are far more moderate conclusions which is all the science actually supports. On this you are not going to be able to base a grand climate change holy war.

So... what more need be said? The climate change crusade is canceled. Go home.

Comment Re:Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score 0) 709

Nice attempt at a goal post move. The issue is not GW but AGW and the the linked concepts of carbon caps and carbon taxes.

As to facts... its a big complex issue with many sub-subjects.

Do you want to go anywhere in particular?

Because if you want me to sperg on the issue, I can do it... and you're going to make an appeal to authority, I'm going to laugh at it, and then we're going to part with both of us throwing insults.

That's what happens.

So can you promise not to make an appeal to authority? Because if you can't make that promise... then I can promise how this is going to end.

Comment Re:Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score 0) 709

Because too many of them virtue signaled on AGW without understanding the science and now they feel like if Al Gore is wrong they're somehow stupid.

Don't get me wrong, some of them are genuinely stupid people... but there's a lot of misplaced trust, lazy thinking, appeals to authority gone rampant... and various other things.

But at the end of the day, their egos got committed to the "cause"... and now they just don't want to feel stupid.

You can evaluate this pretty easily by actually querying them on the science... most people that swear up and down one way or the other don't actually know anything beyond what children are taught in 1st grade. It boils down to happy cartoon suns with squiggly sun rays. Start querying methodology... and suddenly they don't want to talk about it anymore... which is literally where the actual discussion starts... consistently bailing at the start of something that is professed to be understood and which there are professed strong opinions about... is suggestive.

Comment Re:Can anyone say proudly uninformed troll? (Score 1) 188

1. Baseless insult.
2. Nuclear power operates very efficiently outside their influence. Thus the impact of the influence is prescriptive on efficiency.
3. Cite your source for why I'm wrong or this is just posturing.
4. Baseless insult.
5. I could use the same argument against people using the Great Depression as the singular economic example and yet everyone seems to do it. This is just more posturing on your part.

We can go into things if you're at all able to do more than posture and insult. But I rather suspect that's all you've got.

Comment Re: Can anyone say wind turbine boondoggle? (Score 1) 188

1. You're making the Somalia argument... I think I'll call this argumentum ad somalia.

2. Your dam rebuttal makes no sense in the context of dams. You're now arguing that the regulatory burden of daming a river and creating artificial lakes is the same as putting solar panels on the ground. This is literally stupid. And since you made this argument you're either fail trolling or are yourself stupid. Either way your point is not acceptable on any logical basis.

3. No citation from your google source... so I can ignore that now. Thanks.

4. Failing to give reasons means you simply referring to an argument that you didn't actually make. Absent you making an argument about economics that has any falsifiable component, I can't address it because it is not actually an argument. You're just saying you have an argument... but you're not defining it so its a null argument until defined. I can as easily respond that I have a rebuttal to the argument you're not making.

5. A goal post move will remain a goal post move indifferent to how badly you need to move the goal post. The problems with your own argument are not my problem.

Comment Re: Can anyone say wind turbine boondoggle? (Score 1) 188

1. Negative, it is competitive outside of that interference as you yourself conceded. End of story. The only difference is that you think that interference is legitimate. That's a different discussion and one I'm not interested in right now. You've already conceded the point. You're just not clever enough to see it.

2. Hydro cannot be conflated with solar as one requires government involvement for damming rivers where as putting some solar panels on the ground does not. Your unwillingness to concede the obvious is not required.

3. As to who I trust, cite your source if you want to play the citation game. I'll make you very sorry for doing this but if you want to be punished for acting like an idiot, I am happy to do that. Cite your source please. Direct citation. This is a very stupid move on your part. But if you want to do it. Do it.

4. You say "reasons" but don't say what any of them are... I gave reasons because ironically, it is you that is ignorant and not myself.

5. You asked for a citation and I gave you one. Your distress as being contradicted with a citation is not my problem and if you goal post move, I'll note the goal post move because I'm not an intellectual lightweight.

Comment Re: Can anyone say wind turbine boondoggle? (Score 1) 188

1. Nope. You simply ignored everything and made the same dumb argument people like you always make. The issue was addressed. Nuclear is entirely competitive outside political interference by anti nuclear activists.

2. Your lack of agreement that 1+1=2 is not required for 1+1=2

Politics is not economics or logistics.

3. Anyone that walks around in the suburbs or rural areas and just has eye balls can see it.

4. Jobs exist in places where labor is... its a dynamic relationship. Cut the subsidies and the labor won't be there and the jobs will follow the labor. You can't evaluate economics if you don't understand economics.

5. I made a claim and I substantiated that claim when asked for a citation. Your goalpost move is noted for what it is and ignored.

Slashdot Top Deals

fortune: cpu time/usefulness ratio too high -- core dumped.

Working...