Carbon dioxide hysteria (Page 137/170)
ray b JAN 11, 04:10 PM
we have 750,000,000 reason's to know that son of a B lies
and you believe his lies still ? WHY ?
AND REPEAT THEM HERE
OVER AND OVER
WHY ?
olejoedad JAN 11, 05:17 PM
Could you please list the 750,000,000 reasons?
rinselberg JAN 11, 05:53 PM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:
Could you please list the 750,000,000 reasons?


"Final tally of lies: Analysts say Trump told 30,000 mistruths—that’s [an average of] 21 a day—during [his] presidency"
Gino Spocchia for the Independent; January 21, 2021.
https://www.independent.co....idency-b1790285.html

The article links to articles from the Washington Post and CNN as corroberating evidence.

That's a media report, but here's something from academia that is only 14 pages, excluding the long list of references that goes on for 4 more pages.

“The Lies of Donald Trump: A Taxonomy”
James P. Pfiffner; George Mason University.
Prepared for publication in "The Trump Presidency and Executive Power," edited by Charles Lamb. Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming, 2019.
https://pfiffner.gmu.edu/wp...Trump-A-Taxonomy.pdf

SUMMARY

quote
The most important lies of Donald Trump differ significantly from previous presidential lies.

Other presidents have lied for a variety of reasons, from legitimate lies concerning national security to trivial misstatements, to shading the truth, to avoiding embarrassment, to serious lies of policy deception. The paper distinguishes four types of Trump’s lies: 1) trivial lies, 2) exaggerations and self aggrandizing lies; 3) lies to deceive the public; and 4) egregious lies. It then analyzes the consequences of lies with respect to misinformation encoding and the relationship of lies to loyalty and power. The most serious lies of Donald Trump were egregious false statements that were demonstrably contrary to well known facts.

The paper concludes that his lies were detrimental to the democratic process, and that his continued adherence to demonstrably false statements undermined enlightenment epistemology and corroded the premises of liberal democracy.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-11-2024).]

olejoedad JAN 11, 08:42 PM
TDS is apparent in these two.....
rinselberg JAN 11, 09:17 PM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

Progress in the understanding of science is derived by asking questions about things we don't know, and also about things we think we already know.

The current 'climate' in most of the science community is that one isn't allowed to ask questions, one is just to accept the answers.

BTW, solar observations have been ongoing for hundreds of years, we just have better instruments now.

You should quit accepting what you are told without question.

It really limits your outlook of the world around you.


What basis do you have for that assertion?

I don't think there's any short, simple way to disprove it. I keep up with media reports about science. I see all kinds of new questions still being asked, and researched, in all the various fields of science. You might be surprised at some of the previously accepted ideas or "facts" that are currently being reexamined. But what about climate science and climate-related research, which is the most directly relevant to this discussion?

Many years ago already, there was a discrepancy between what the computer models were predicting and what the weather monitoring stations around the world were observing. The computer models of the greenhouse effect—the effect of CO2 and the other known greenhouse gases in the atmosphere—were predicting higher temperatures around the world than were actually being recorded. So that raised the question of whether the computer models were flawed, or whether there was heat energy in the earth's climate system that was not being detected by the weather monitoring stations. And that prompted climate researchers and oceanographers to put more resources into monitoring the temperature of ocean water, and particularly, ocean water deeper below the surface. And they discovered more heat energy at deeper levels in the ocean than was previously known.

So their ideas had to be revised. They came to the realization that winds and ocean currents have a larger effect than was previously known, in terms of causing sun-warmed ocean water near the surface to be pushed downwards to deeper depths, even to the extent that warmer waters can be submerged below colder waters. That helped them understand that the computer models of the greenhouse effect were not drastically in error. They found the "missing" heat energy, by looking deeper below the surface of the ocean.

I see that as counterfactual to this narrative that "olejoedad" is talking up... that scientists are not asking enough questions. That was many years ago, already, but I don't think it's any different today. I guess I could try to narrow that down to a particular year or so by searching news reports online. The reports about the "missing" heat energy being discovered deeper within the ocean.

PS. I just thought of a new and more recent "counterfactual."

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-11-2024).]

olejoedad JAN 12, 06:41 AM
Serious question rinse.

Were you exposed to college level and above scientific training?

Did your employment demand critical thinking involving scientific principles?

Did your employment require innovative thinking to solve ongoing technical issues that affected profitably, safety and and regulatory mandates?
ray b JAN 12, 09:21 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

Serious question rinse.

Were you exposed to college level and above scientific training?

Did your employment demand critical thinking involving scientific principles?

Did your employment require innovative thinking to solve ongoing technical issues that affected profitably, safety and and regulatory mandates?



watch him as he try's to baffle with science

and fail

just like he can't spot the rightwing lies told by the snarlson or the rump
ray b JAN 12, 09:27 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

TDS is apparent in these two.....



trump deplorable syndrome is only seen in the MAGA mass

it causes red hats in over weight buffoon's
who chant lock her up
and believe every lie from the rump
with out a single fact ever needed
olejoedad JAN 12, 10:02 AM
Tucker interviews controversial figures and asks intelligent questions of them.

He also has opinions, as do we all.

At least when he expresses his opinions, he does so in a succinct and intelligent manner, and backs them up with facts.

My opinion is that you could work on that aspect when you post on this Forum.

rinselberg JAN 12, 11:04 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

Serious question rinse.

Were you exposed to college level and above scientific training?

Did your employment demand critical thinking involving scientific principles?

Did your employment require innovative thinking to solve ongoing technical issues that affected profitably, safety and and regulatory mandates?


Yes, yes, and yes. Or perhaps I should say "y3 where y=yes."

I designed and created customized or "one-off" software applications for the aerospace and defense industry. I started my career by scripting computer code, mostly in FORTRAN (or Fortran.) Sometimes I created small, stand-alone computer programs. Sometimes I worked on parts of much larger computer programs that were the product of large teams of "coders." Often I was assigned the task of changing the code to fix a "bug" or accommodate a user request. I was titularized as a Software Developer or Software Engineer.

As the years went by and I moved voluntarily from one employer to another, my responsibilities shifted. Mostly, I developed software test procedures and executed the test procedures, having been retitularized as a Software Test and Quality Assurance Engineer.

In the last part of my career, I was an hourly contractor, whereas before, I had been a direct, salaried employee. My last "gig" was focused on the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense or THAAD missile system. I was an integrated systems test technician, executing test procedures that were mostly already given to me as scripts, although sometimes I modified the test procedures.

I was a "software facing" technician. The testing could involve using oscilloscopes and voltmeters and the like as test instruments—electronic systems testing—but that wasn't my thing. Although previously in my career, I had gained a small familiarity with radio signal test generators and test equipment... a different and smaller project, at another and smaller company.

I remember standing or being seated in front of a video terminal and using a keyboard to type in data, and then archiving the output as "files" of data, which I might examine myself. Sometimes I was a "dummy" THAAD system operator, doing what an actual THAAD crew member would be doing in a combat scenario to set up a missile launch.

Some of the testing took place inside a large SCIF or Secure Compartmented Information Facility which was large enough to contain, within an air-conditioned and roofed facility, an actual THAAD missile launch system. There was the large, desert "camo" or uniformly olive green painted truck that transported and launched the missiles, and at least one THAAD missile in a text fixture, next to the truck.

Before becoming an hourly contractor, I worked for four modestly sized companies and finally, the one very large corporation. I never worked directly for the government.

Reducing human greenhouse gas emissions... always a good decision!

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-12-2024).]