SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

October 18th, 2007, 1:07 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: JWDWhile the right-wing contrarian propaganda machine sputters, nitpicks, attacks, and distorts climate science in general and Al Gore’s excellent movie in particular, its wheels are starting to come off. again with the name calling.For those who don't know, the "right-wing contrarian propaganda machine" is mrs dash's term for anyone and everyone who disagrees with the hypothesis of antropogenic global warming.An example of this right-wing contrarian propaganda:QuoteHigh Court Judge Michael Burton, deciding a lawsuit that questioned the film's suitability for showing in British classrooms, said alore makes nine statements in the film that are not supported by current mainstream scientific consensusThe judge said that, for instance, algore's script implies that Greenland or West Antarctica might melt in the near future, creating a sea level rise of up to 20 feet that would cause devastation from San Francisco to the Netherlands to Bangladesh. The judge called this "distinctly alarmist" and said the consensus view is that, if indeed Greenland melted, it would release this amount of water, "but only after, and over, millennia." Burton also said algore contends that inhabitants of low-lying Pacific atolls have had to evacuate to New Zealand because of global warming. "But there is no such evidence of any such evacuation," the judge said. Another error, according to the judge, is that alore says "a new scientific study shows that for the first time they are finding polar bears that have actually drowned swimming long distances up to 60 miles to find ice." Burton said that perhaps in the future polar bears will drown "by regression of pack-ice" but that the only study found on drowned polar bears attributed four deaths to a stormBut after all, who cares if algore told a pack of lies in his film.The important thing is to get people and governments to act.
 
User avatar
Alan
Posts: 10215
Joined: December 19th, 2001, 4:01 am
Location: California
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

October 18th, 2007, 4:38 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerQuoteOriginally posted by: Alan3. The bum on the cornerDo you know the guy? There are plenty of people who have gotten to know him over the course of his life, and they all want NOTHING to do with that evil arrogant asshole. All bums had a mother, a brother, a cousin, a boss, a friend, a landlord, a probation officer, an AA group, a pastor at some point. There are certainly people who tried much harder to do much more for him than you ever have, and they all got burned. Most people can be decent human beings 24 hours out of the typical day. All a bum can manage is to be polite and cover up his arrogant evil jerk self for six-second stretches. You get to know him a little more, you will change your tune.I would sooner shoot the bum on the corner than spend $10 on him. These people are such arrogant worthless parasites. They should be locked up in prison, being allowed to be homeless bums on my street is too good for them.way harsh, dudeI know quite well the personal story behind some people's homelessness -- people who are not the evil monster you characterize.
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

October 18th, 2007, 4:56 pm

Right-wing contrarian propaganda? Yup. Ppauper’s last post of Thu Oct 18, 07 03:07 PM, in its treatment of the judgment of the movie and his characterization of the movie as … a pack of lies… , is a good example of right-wing contrarian propaganda. Of course, contrary to the implication of the post, I never said the judgment itself was contrarian propaganda. The judge did his best to try to understand a difficult subject, and he issued his ruling. However, as RealClimate says, the judgment is being exploited by contrarians. First ppauper quotes an unnamed source regarding the judgment. I couldn’t find his source – although he often quotes right-wing contrarian op-eds. This quote of what the judge said was biased. The Washington Post story (ref) that covered the story says, in its second sentence: High Court Judge Michael Burton, deciding a lawsuit that questioned the film's suitability for showing in British classrooms, said Wednesday that the movie builds a "powerful" case that global warming is caused by humans and that urgent means are needed to counter it. That is, aside from politics and the “nine errors”, this story says that the judge considered the scientific basis of the film as solid. This is consistent with RealClimate, the scientifically reliable website run by climate scientists. As I posted on Tue Oct 16, 07 05:58 PM, RealClimate, says: The judge, Justice Burton found that "Al Gore's presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change in the film was broadly accurate". Actually, RealClimate strongly disagreed with the judge on whether the “nine errors” were errors at all, as I posted.ppauper winds up characterizing the movie as … a pack of lies… None of what the judge said justifies ppauper’s characterization of Al Gore’s movie as anything like a “pack of lies”.What we have here is just another boring example of ppauper’s right-wing contrarian propaganda posts.Ref:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... ----------
Last edited by JWD on October 18th, 2007, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
 
User avatar
farmer
Posts: 13477
Joined: December 16th, 2002, 7:09 am

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

October 18th, 2007, 5:32 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: Alanway harsh, dudelol...QuoteOriginally posted by: AlanI know quite well the personal story behind some people's homelessness -- people who are not the evil monster you characterize.What is the story? Schizos, junkies, drunks, people who just like living outdoors... or just the majority of total arrogant pricks?Schizos are some of the most arrogant people on Earth. They are totally impulsive and convinced of their own nonsense beyond any rational check. They are driven by bad intution, and too lazy/over-confident to be rational. And they are so self-important, they get all emotional about things normal people wouldn't have the time to assign importance to. Schizos suck.QuoteOriginally posted by: Alansome people's homelessnessI thought we were taking about bums, not "homeless people." Homeless people is just a loaded way to say that there are people who are neither bums nor drifters, but people just like you and me who can't afford a car to sleep in. Hah!Drifters, scumbags, lowlifes, psychos, junkies... they all share the same sin: Incontinence. They belong in Circle II, not on my street. If they are pets, then they are very bad dogs. If somebody is homeless and he is not a scumbag, he can come live with me any time.
Last edited by farmer on October 17th, 2007, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

October 19th, 2007, 3:06 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: JWDRight-wing contrarian propaganda? Yup. Ppauper’s last post of Thu Oct 18, 07 03:07 PM, in its treatment of the judgment of the movie and his characterization of the movie as … a pack of lies… , is a good example of right-wing contrarian propaganda. Of course, contrary to the implication of the post, I never said the judgment itself was contrarian propaganda. By the location of your post in juxtaposition to other posts in this thread, there was an implication
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 17th, 2007, 3:51 pm

The judgment text for Al Gore’s Movie, Consensus, the IPCC, and the Contrarians The text of the judgment is now available for Al Gore’s Movie “An Inconvenient Truth”. It shows that the judge agreed (Sects. 17.i, 22) that the scientific content of the film is “broadly accurate” and that the film is “substantially founded upon scientific research and fact”. The nine so-called ‘errors’ were ONLY deemed by the judge to be inconsistent with scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports. The judge explicitly refused to otherwise judge the scientific nature of the film.The judge was clear (Sect. 17.ii) on the following two essential points used in his judgment of the film. (1): There is scientific consensus on the main aspects of global warming - existence, mostly man-made origins, adverse effects, mitigation possibility. (2): The IPCC reports document the vast quantity of published peer-reviewed research behind this consensus. He also deemed the film suitable for showing at schools, with the inclusion of a “guidance note”. The case against the film was dismissed.So much for the right-wing contrarian op-ed distortions about the film. But wait – let’s apply the judgment consistently. It says (Sect. 44): … there are views of "sceptics" who do not accept even the consensus views of the IPCC. The word “sceptics” is the same as what others call “contrarians”. A consistent application of the judge’s doctrine - if a statement is inconsistent with scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports, then that statement is in ‘error’ - would be:If a contrarian statement is inconsistent with scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports, then that contrarian statement is in ‘error’.Since contrarian statements are - by definition - inconsistent with scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports, contrarian statements are in ‘error’. Can we expect that this obvious conclusion - that contrarian statements are in ‘error’ - will be broadcast soon by the right-wing contrarian op-eds?Ref:http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... ml--------
Last edited by JWD on November 16th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 62424
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 18th, 2007, 3:21 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperThe important thing is to get people and governments to act.That sounds like a good idea. What do you suggest in real terms?
Last edited by Cuchulainn on November 17th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 20th, 2007, 2:29 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: CuchulainnQuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperThe important thing is to get people and governments to act.That sounds like a good idea. What do you suggest in real terms?I was of course being sarcastic: algore believes the ends justify the means>>But after all, who cares if algore told a pack of lies in his film.>>The important thing is to get people and governments to act.
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 20th, 2007, 2:29 pm

I'm dreaming of a white christmas
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 20th, 2007, 2:31 pm

save the planet: drink rat's milkevidently, rats fart less than cows hence lower C02 emissions
 
User avatar
JWD
Posts: 1310
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 20th, 2007, 6:50 pm

Where is the pack of lies? Ppauper on Tue Nov 20, 07 03:29 PM says: >>But after all, who cares if algore told a pack of lies in his film.The judge in dismissing the case brought against Al Gore’s film said that the film is “broadly accurate” and “substantially founded upon scientific research and fact”, and he moreover deemed the film suitable for showing at schools with a guidance note. The judge characterized the ‘errors’ in the film as being ONLY those nine statements that disagreed with the scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports. If ppauper wants to calls the movie ‘errors’ as “lies”, then to be consistent with the judgment, any statement is a “lie” (‘error’) if it disagrees with the scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports. Since every contrarian post from ppauper is chock full of statements that disagree with the scientific consensus as documented in the IPCC reports, evidently every contrarian ppauper post consists of a “pack of lies”.Ref:http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2288.html --------
Last edited by JWD on November 20th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jan Dash, PhD

Editor, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change:
https://www.worldscientific.com/page/en ... ate-change

Book:
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 71241_0053
 
User avatar
TraderJoe
Posts: 11048
Joined: February 1st, 2005, 11:21 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 21st, 2007, 10:48 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerQuoteOriginally posted by: Alan3. The bum on the cornerDo you know the guy? There are plenty of people who have gotten to know him over the course of his life, and they all want NOTHING to do with that evil arrogant asshole. All bums had a mother, a brother, a cousin, a boss, a friend, a landlord, a probation officer, an AA group, a pastor at some point. There are certainly people who tried much harder to do much more for him than you ever have, and they all got burned. Most people can be decent human beings 24 hours out of the typical day. All a bum can manage is to be polite and cover up his arrogant evil jerk self for six-second stretches. You get to know him a little more, you will change your tune.I would sooner shoot the bum on the corner than spend $10 on him. These people are such arrogant worthless parasites. They should be locked up in prison, being allowed to be homeless bums on my street is too good for them.Where's the love Farmer?
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 22nd, 2007, 2:28 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: JWDWhere is the pack of lies?
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 22nd, 2007, 2:29 pm

Women abort, get sterilized 'to reduce carbon footprint'
 
User avatar
TraderJoe
Posts: 11048
Joined: February 1st, 2005, 11:21 pm

Uh-oh another climate change thread...

November 22nd, 2007, 11:56 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperQuoteOriginally posted by: JWDWhere is the pack of lies? This judge should be sacked!
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...


GZIP: On