Global warming dials up our risks, UN report says

[ballen0351]

If the question is as concrete as 2+2=x, then you can be confident that you have the entire context of the question when you answer, "x=4."

But what if the statement, "2+2=4" is in response to the questions, "When does 2 plus 2 equal 5?" Then the context changes, and suddenly the "fact" of the statement becomes only part of the answer. This guy asserts (rightly or wrongly) that 2+2 equals 5. here's another neat math paradox where 2+2=5. And what if you are talking about a completely different scale than traditional math? For example, if you have a two day training classes that start on the 2nd of the month, training would be done on the 3rd. In this context, 2+2=3.

Or what if the conversation was really about simple math? The converse is also often done. It doesn't take much to muddy the waters with specious "facts."

The point is, in more complex, nuanced discussions, facts are very important, but can also be intentionally misleading. Context matters, and what IS said can very well be less important than what is intentionally omitted. In writing, this is called 'exclusionary detailing.' Really, it's lying by omission, and is a common tactic in media and in politics.

From the outside looking in, ballen and Flying Crane together make the right answer (in my opinion). Yes facts matter. And yes, context also matters, as do the facts that are NOT reported. Facts can be true, but facts do not equal truth.

Also, bias matters, and sites that are faux grassroots organizations funded and supported by interest groups should be considered suspect sources for reliable disclosure of "truth."

except a fact is a fact. 2+2 always =4 its a fact. Temps didn't go up over the last 17 years can be proven true as a fact. it doesn't matter who says it if its true.

 

[ballen0351]

Its a FACT that we don't know whats causing temps to change or not. Could be people, could be cow farts, could be the natural rise and fall that's happened over the last million years, could be space invaders. So don't make up dooms day crap as a reason to clean things up, don't invent things to create new taxes, don't say countries A through Z must cut back pollution but we will exempt F,L,N,P,Qand V well because they are still growing and B because they wont do it any way.

 

[Flying Crane]

Its a FACT that we don't know whats causing temps to change or not.

wrong.

Could be people, could be cow farts, could be the natural rise and fall that's happened over the last million years,

it's all of these, to some degree.

could be space invaders.

I'll wait for billc to actually introduce this notion before I consider whether i want to waste time debating it.

So don't make up dooms day crap as a reason to clean things up,

'cause damn, the last thing we wanna do is clean things up, for any reason.

don't invent things to create new taxes, don't say countries A through Z must cut back pollution but we will exempt F,L,N,P,Qand V well because they are still growing and B because they wont do it any way.

the solution does need to be universal. but that's a different debate from the cause.

 

[ballen0351]

wrong.

OK prove it..........

it's all of these, to some degree.

proof......not a theory but actual proof

I'll wait for billc to actually introduce this notion before I consider whether i want to waste time debating it.

as provable as any other

'cause damn, the last thing we wanna do is clean things up, for any reason.

plenty of REAL reasons to clean up we don't need to invent fake ones that we have no control over

the solution does need to be universal. but that's a different debate from the cause.

funny the only solutions I hear are ones that are going to cost me a lot more $$$$ and loss of freedoms and are not universal

 

[Flying Crane]

except a fact is a fact. 2+2 always =4 its a fact. Temps didn't go up over the last 17 years can be proven true as a fact. it doesn't matter who says it if its true.

in an earlier post i have acknowledged that there has been a "pause" in the rate of surface temp increase. to you and billc and your "sources", this is proof that global climate change is a hoax. hoever, there are many other measurements that, taken as a complete picture, tell us something entirely different. things like, how the oceans can absorb huge amounts of heat so that surface temp appears unaffected but deep ocean temp does go up. then, rising oceans due to water's natural expansion as it warms, and the melting glaciers that contribute to rising seas as well, support this phenomenon. so you see, a pause in the rise of surface temps is not contradictory of global warming.

others have pointed to increased snowfall in antarctica as proof of global climate change as a hoax. well, antarctica is actually a desert and gets very little snowfall overall. snow becomes more likely as temps in that region rise, (it's called "climate change" because typical weather patterns such as antarctic temps, are altered and become much more erratic and a-typical, even if temps everywhere do not simply rise in a straight line) so greater snowfall in antarctica supports global climate change completely.

but hey, this is real science, which is what you seem to want to reject. oh well, people here have tried over and over to educate you, but you've repeatedly chosen deliberate ignorance. that's your choice.

 

[Flying Crane]

OK prove it..........

proof......not a theory but actual proof

as provable as any other

this thread is chock full of overwhelming evidence. all you gotta do is read and open your mind.

funny the only solutions I hear are ones that are going to cost me a lot more $$$$ and loss of freedoms and are not universal

again, that's a different topic.

 

[ballen0351]

OK prove it..........

proof......not a theory but actual proof

as provable as any other
[/quote}

this thread is chock full of overwhelming evidence. all you gotta do is read and open your mind.

WRONG its full of theory and not even all scientists agree on the theory. That's not proof. That's a guess

again, that's a different topic.

Yep one you don't want to touch because you know there is nothing that can be done

 

[ballen0351]

in an earlier post i have acknowledged that there has been a "pause" in the rate of surface temp increase. to you and billc and your "sources", this is proof that global climate change is a hoax. hoever, there are many other measurements that, taken as a complete picture, tell us something entirely different. things like, how the oceans can absorb huge amounts of heat so that surface temp appears unaffected but deep ocean temp does go up. then, rising oceans due to water's natural expansion as it warms, and the melting glaciers that contribute to rising seas as well, support this phenomenon. so you see, a pause in the rise of surface temps is not contradictory of global warming.

OH so up until 17 years ago none of that absorption happened huh? LOL whatever your warming god tells you huh

others have pointed to increased snowfall in antarctica as proof of global climate change as a hoax. well, antarctica is actually a desert and gets very little snowfall overall. snow becomes more likely as temps in that region rise, (it's called "climate change" because typical weather patterns such as antarctic temps, are altered and become much more erratic and a-typical, even if temps everywhere do not simply rise in a straight line) so greater snowfall in antarctica supports global climate change completely.

except 30 years ago this was proof we were going back into an ice age. Well that was the accepted theory by "scientists" anyway lol

but hey, this is real science, which is what you seem to want to reject. oh well, people here have tried over and over to educate you, but you've repeatedly chosen deliberate ignorance. that's your choice.

Im not rejecting REAL science. REAL science shows temps rise and fall naturally over time we are coming OUT of the last Ice Age. See Science tells me to exit an ICE age temps must WARM up some you know to melt the ice that once covered most of the US Canada and Europe. So looking at REAL science I don't need your global warming religion indoctrination

 

[Flying Crane]

WRONG its full of theory and not even all scientists agree on the theory. That's not proof. That's a guess

no, scientific consensus is how it works in the scientific community. and no, that doesn't mean every scientist agrees. however, there is vast evidence in support, and the huge majority does agree, and most of those who do not, have suspicious affiliations and suspicious motives. but we've discussed this already and there's not much point in doing it all over again. as i said, you've chosen what you want to believe in, and you've chosen to reject real science. oh well.

Yep one you don't want to touch because you know there is nothing that can be done

no, it's a different debate. however, i'll say that it's my opinion that we've already crossed a critical threshold so that even if we globally ended 100% of all pollution today, it's too late. the pollution already in the atmosphere has built up a lot of climate change momentum and we are gonna be in for some rough times for humanity and most other species on the planet. we may make the planet uninhabitable, or at least very uncomfortable, for humanity tho it may not play out completely for a few more generations. given that global pollution continues to increase, well i'm doubtful that there is much hope in the end.

but i don't use that as an excuse to throw up my hands and say I don't give a ****, let's just keep on this suicidal path that we've chosen.

 

[Steve]

2+2 equals 4 except for when it doesn't.

Facts matter, but so does context. And exclusionary detailing is a tactic widely used to good effect, particularly in complex discussions.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

[Steve]

I can't believe you guys are so sure you're right.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

[ballen0351]

2+2 equals 4 except for when it doesn't.

which is never

Facts matter, but so does context. And exclusionary detailing is a tactic widely used to good effect, particularly in complex discussions.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

facts are facts

 

[ballen0351]

I can't believe you guys are so sure you're right.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Im not that's the point we don't know and never will.

 

[Flying Crane]

Im not that's the point we don't know and never will.

only if you ignore the vast quantity of real science in this. which is what you are doing.

 

[K-man]

Originally Posted by K-man
There is no 'proof' so nobody is proving anybody wrong.




well, not exactly. The evidence is overwhelming. Is that the same as 110% proof? no, but for the scientific community (real scientists, not hacks and pretenders), this overwhelming evidence paints a very clear picture, one that is highly reliable. This is science, after all.

Many people don't understand the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence'. You might think anyone who has anything to do with the legal system might know that.
:asian:

 

[Flying Crane]

facts are facts

that's incredibly naive.

 

[ballen0351]

no, scientific consensus is how it works in the scientific community. and no, that doesn't mean every scientist agrees. however, there is vast evidence in support, and the huge majority does agree, and most of those who do not, have suspicious affiliations and suspicious motives. but we've discussed this already and there's not much point in doing it all over again. as i said, you've chosen what you want to believe in, and you've chosen to reject real science. oh well.

Naa I just choose common sense

no, it's a different debate. however, i'll say that it's my opinion that we've already crossed a critical threshold so that even if we globally ended 100% of all pollution today, it's too late. the pollution already in the atmosphere has built up a lot of climate change momentum and we are gonna be in for some rough times for humanity and most other species on the planet. we may make the planet uninhabitable, or at least very uncomfortable, for humanity tho it may not play out completely for a few more generations. given that global pollution continues to increase, well i'm doubtful that there is much hope in the end.

but i don't use that as an excuse to throw up my hands and say I don't give a ****, let's just keep on this suicidal path that we've chosen.

Ohh your one of the chicken little we are all going to die guys LOL It all comes together now.

 

[ballen0351]

that's incredibly naive.

Wait so facts are not facts in your world. Well no wonder you believe this nonsense

 

[ballen0351]

Many people don't understand the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence'. You might think anyone who has anything to do with the legal system might know that.
:asian:

Yep guilty beyond reasonable doubt is pretty clear. The way I see it there is lots of reasonable doubt on this topic

 

[ballen0351]

only if you ignore the vast quantity of real science in this. which is what you are doing.

Says you and you are?