22

6/4/2007 3:48:25 PM

^^^ Well, it is an argument to ignorance. So, I guess it worked in your case.

6/4/2007 3:50:30 PM

Quote :

"asserting that something is false, while ignoring evidence that suggests it's true"

the bible is one piece of evidence that suggests life first began on this planet about 6,000 years ago

now tell me what is the logical fallacy for someone asserting that claim as being false, ie that life has been going on for more than 6,000 years on this planet?

6/4/2007 3:53:56 PM

^ Asserting that something is false is not in and of itself a fallacious . Asserting it's false AND ignoring the evidence that suggests it's true IS fallacious (it's hooksaws favorite tactic too).

If I just said "the Bible is wrong, life has been going on longer than 6000 years" and you asked me why and I said "just because" I would be wrong. But, there is clear evidence in carbon dating and archeological data that the earth and life has existed longer than that. If you asked me why and I cited that evidence, then you either have to change your position, or point out why my evidence is flawed.

6/4/2007 4:07:17 PM

Quote :

"whats the logical fallacy for interpreting a majority opinion as a fact so definitively true that "there is no debate"?"

It's called an appeal to authority, and it's perfectly acceptable in debate when neither side is an expert on an issue. Such as... oh let's say a low-level IT guy and a liberal studies major arguing against a history teacher.

6/4/2007 4:12:52 PM

cause high school history teachers are clearly the foremost authority on atmospheric sciences

ps: i run the whole IT department bitch

6/4/2007 4:17:48 PM

Way to show off that reading comprehension. You're doing your technical education proud.

I was stating that none of us know what we're talking about when it comes to the details of climate science.

And as such, appeals to authority are perfectly acceptable. Anything other than an appeal to authority in our case would be an example of a "bullshit fallacy."

6/4/2007 4:21:35 PM

its too bad that while you were in school at state you had to rely on reading articles and watching al gore movies instead of taking some MEA classes and actually having personal conversations with PhD holding climate scientists...knock on that all you want...but let me ask you this...if you read a journal article...or a summary article in newsweek or wherever...if you have a question for the author, can you ask him to clarify? of course not, because you're just reading an article...whereas if you are taking a class and have a question, you can ask for clarification...that seems to be the problem with a lot of you all who truly dont know what you're talking about when it comes to climate science

again, feel free to downplay what i may have learned from climate scientists with doctorate degrees...its still a valuable resource that you, Boone, apparently didnt have...and its quite evident

6/4/2007 4:33:40 PM

1) I never saw An Inconvenient Truth

2) Dude, I totally once talked to these professors. Totally. At a school that's completely unknown when it comes to climate research.

3) That scientific experience, that placed you at odds with 95% of the scientific community, clearly was very helpful.

[Edited on June 4, 2007 at 4:38 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2007 4:37:42 PM

oh look, you're downplaying it just like i said

and underexaggerating it as "one time i once asked this one guy one question"

basically grasping for straws since you have nothing else

btw: NC State is really nationally known for their History department...talk about a subject base that you can understand just from reading

Quote :

" 95% of the scientific community"

i like how a week ago it was 99%...then a few days ago 98%...now you've retreated back to 95%

6/4/2007 4:39:03 PM

^^^^ Nice try. BTW, at least I'm working on a master's--when are you getting yours?

Quote :

"In general, debaters should be called down for committing argumentum ad verecundiam only when (a) they rely on an unqualified source for information about facts without other (qualified) sources of verification, or (b) they imply that some policy must be right simply because so-and-so thought so."

In this case, many are relying only on the unqualified source known as Al Gore and his movie, which is the main reason I started this thread. In addition, a lot of people are agreeing with the IPCC "so-and-sos," and the IPCC is attempting to make and change policy--make no mistake about it.

Quote :

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been established by WMO and UNEP to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant for the understanding of climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation."

http://www.ipcc.ch/

[Edited on June 4, 2007 at 4:46 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2007 4:42:23 PM

Quote :

"oh look, you're downplaying it just like i said"

So what you are saying is, you know you have a credibility problem when

1) You're a stoner
2) You took one class...how many years ago?
3) Think that this "knowledge" means you know more than people capable of reading peer reviewed journals

6/4/2007 4:49:49 PM

1) Dude, again. You talked to professors about the subject. That makes you at all qualified to speak with authority on the subject? More of an authority than the scientific organizations listed above?

2) Actually, NCSU's Public History program is nationally known. It's a damn good program.

Quote :

"talk about a subject base that you can understand just from reading"

2a) it's history education. If there's a subject that can't be learned from a book, it's education.
2b) lol, says the IT guy. Not even the CS guy... the IT guy. Why didn't you just save some money by going to Wake Tech?

3)

Quote :

"i like how a week ago it was 99%...then a few days ago 98%...now you've retreated back to 95%"

It's a little sad that you're remember what I say better than I am. You must care a whole lot.



[Edited on June 4, 2007 at 4:58 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2007 4:51:05 PM

Quote :

"So what you are saying is, you know you have a credibility problem when 1) You're a stoner"

i'm not actually..havent smoked in over 2 years...so thats actually a negative point for YOUR credibility...btw isnt half of your party stoners? might not want to bite the hand that feeds you bullshit

Quote :

"2) You took one class...how many years ago?"

no i actually got a degree in marine and coastal sciences...once again, theres another negative point against your "credibility"...although i dont know how much credibility an alias troll ever had

Quote :

"3) Think that this "knowledge" means you know more than people capable of reading peer reviewed journals"

i already touched base on that...please re-read the thread if you get a spare moment in your busy schedule of trolling

Quote :

"Dude, again. You talked to professors about the subject. That makes you at all qualified to speak with authority on the subject? More of an authority than the scientific organizations listed above?"

no its just a real perspective that you seem interested in completely ignoring...also who the fuck are you to speak on behalf of the "scientific organizations listed above"? congratulations, you read what they said on a website, i guess thats a great substitute for years of personal educational interaction

Quote :

"2) Actually, NCSU's Public History program is nationally known. It's a damn good program. "

high school history teacher...those 4 words strike fear in the hearts of cardiologists and neurosurgeons everywhere

Quote :

"2b) lol, says the IT guy. Not even the CS guy... the IT guy. Why didn't you just go to Wake Tech?"

i'm making good money running the information technology department at my company...so your little community college insults dont really mean shit...now if i was a high school teacher i would probably criticize any occupation to try and boost myself up

Quote :

"It's a little sad that you're remember what I say better than I am. You must care a whole lot."

(backpeddling)

6/4/2007 5:02:11 PM

Do we even know that his guy has paper from NCSU? Sounds like he must have squeaked by with some sort of degree, and he is a bottom dweller at an IT support center for some mid level company.

6/4/2007 5:03:09 PM

hi im blind hate, i'm an alias troll...my other account was suspended for trolling but that doesnt stop me from posting!

6/4/2007 5:04:08 PM

Quote :

"no its just a real perspective that you seem interested in completely ignoring...also who the fuck are you to speak on behalf of the "scientific organizations listed above"? congratulations, you read what they said on a website, i guess thats a great substitute for years of personal educational interaction"

I don't see how conversations you had with professors years ago, where you probably forgot it all (after all, you aren't using your degree for anything), is somehow worth more weight than modern up to date peer reviewed journals.

6/4/2007 5:04:50 PM

Quote :

"i'm making good money running the information technology department at my company...so your little community college insults dont really mean shit...now if i was a high school teacher i would probably criticize any occupation to try and boost myself up"

I have a hard time believing anyone running a department has as much time as you do to post on this web site during the day.

6/4/2007 5:05:59 PM

edit post motherfucker, learn to use it

6/4/2007 5:06:59 PM

Quote :

"marine and coastal sciences"

ahahaha

I had thought you at least squeaked by with a 1.5 GPA in a CS degree or something.

We have a Marine and Coastal Science degree? Shouldn't you have gone to UNCW?

Also, so then you literally learned your career out of a book, I take it?


PS: does "IT Deptartment" = McDonalds wifi?

[Edited on June 4, 2007 at 5:11 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2007 5:08:00 PM

nah i self taught myself everything about computers

apparently i know plenty since i got this job in the summer of 01 and came back full time in 02 after i graduated and i'm still here...~$75k / year...good enough for me with no wife or kids to support

LOL at a history major laughing at anybody's choice of study though

and no i actually did scientific research...barrier island transects...core sample comparisons...wrote environmental impact statements on proposed construction projects

but please, continue...its pretty funny to see how many more misconceptions you have about me

Quote :

"Shouldn't you have gone to UNCW?"

maybe in hindsight...but when I came to State I was in the engineering program

6/4/2007 5:14:50 PM

Quote :

"it's history education. If there's a subject that can't be learned from a book, it's education."

Bullshit, Boone-tard. I took two graduate-level courses in education last fall at State, and both course had quite a few textbooks--in addition to a couple reams of handouts. I learned quite a bit from those texts; perhaps you just don't retain things very well.

6/4/2007 5:16:41 PM

^^good career = money

^have you ever taught non-college kids? Would you know, then?

6/4/2007 5:20:10 PM

^ No, I'll leave K-12 to you, Boone-tard. You can try to navigate the bullshit of NCLB and the ISLLC standards. I'm quite happy with a postsecondary institution and andragogy.

6/4/2007 5:27:21 PM

But you didn't answer the question.

Do you know what you're talking about? Ask a prof who's taught K-12. Ask them how important book-knowledge is relative to experience.

6/4/2007 5:29:20 PM

^ I have--ELP 550 was K-12 educational leadership. And there are dozens of effective teaching methods available. Anyone that had taken Zinn's Philosophy of Teaching Inventory would know that.

PS: And a lot of today's academics are putting down lecture, case study, and memorization as effective teaching methods, too. But that doesn't mean they're right.

[Edited on June 4, 2007 at 5:35 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2007 5:32:50 PM

I'm not really going to respond, because anyone who thinks -a- class on k-12 education makes them knowledgeable on the subject is silly.

however, I couldn't pass this up

Quote :

"I'm quite happy with a postsecondary institution and andragogy."

don't you mean androgyny? Ooooh.

homo

6/4/2007 8:15:55 PM

when you can't argue against facts, attack the other person's grammar and spelling. keep up the good work.

by the way, do you care to provide and numbers that support your claim of "95%" of climate scientists? I'd love to see that poll...

6/4/2007 8:43:36 PM

Quote :

"but please, continue...its pretty funny to see how many more misconceptions you have about me"

You don't have any credibility here. You don't run an IT department, and you don't make 75k a year. Man up and post your paycheck if you have the balls.

6/4/2007 10:32:28 PM

^^^ WTF are you talking about, you goddamned rabid moonbat's ass pucker?! If you're being sarcastic, it's a lame attempt.

andragogy: "the methods or techniques used to teach adults."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/andragogy

Sorry I used a big word--and you should've passed up the pwnt attempt. Maybe if you were pursuing higher education such as I am, you'd be smarter. FAIL!

PS: And nothing ever satisfies your ridiculous Weltanschauung (go ahead and look it up). If one doesn't have specific education, you question the knowledge. If one has specific education, you say it's not enough or not good enough or some such blather. You're totally fucking full of moonbat shit.

[Edited on June 4, 2007 at 11:48 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2007 11:46:06 PM

so, uh, anybody care to offer, oh, I dunno, hard-numbers to back up their claim of this alleged "scientific consensus," or will they instead hide behind the IPCC and it's "report" which has been edited by gov'ts of various nations who have butchered it to their liking in order to support their agendas, and which has had several leading scientists come forward and say "I didn't author a damned bit of that report..."

6/5/2007 12:00:08 AM

Quote :

"You don't have any credibility here. You don't run an IT department, and you don't make 75k a year"

I do have credibility (amongst some)...I do run an IT department...and I did make roughly $74,800 last year (plus my $5,000 Christmas bonus )

But since you are on a quest for truth, I'll make you this deal...I will scan and post a picture of my last paystub...if you (Blind Hate) will post your original/alternate TWW screenname

Its your choice

6/5/2007 2:41:02 AM

Quote :

"Sorry I used a big word--and you should've passed up the pwnt attempt. "

I think it's pretty clear that it was a joke.

Quote :

"PS: And nothing ever satisfies your ridiculous Weltanschauung (go ahead and look it up). If one doesn't have specific education, you question the knowledge. If one has specific education, you say it's not enough or not good enough or some such blather. You're totally fucking full of moonbat shit."

How is it a bad thing that I don't accept just any old scientist's credentials when it comes to toppling the scientific consensus? Is it somehow inconsistent that I don't take a non-specialist's view, or an unknown specialist's? I accept the scientific consensus (multiple science foundations' label, not mine), you'd rather trust a dozen unknown scientists working at 2nd tier universities. Who's the moonbat here?

6/5/2007 2:03:43 PM

well, you are happy to accept the credentials of scientists who actually weren't even contacted for the report, so go figure...

6/5/2007 2:12:07 PM

Quote :

"But since you are on a quest for truth, I'll make you this deal...I will scan and post a picture of my last paystub...if you (Blind Hate) will post your original/alternate TWW screenname"

So you really don't have any balls? Why do you need to know any other screenames? I'm not the one that makes fantastic claims, claims people are trolling him with every post he makes, and gets uptight about not knowing the person behind the screen name.

6/5/2007 2:15:27 PM

^^ What report?

What definitive report is this?

6/5/2007 2:21:03 PM

^^^ The IPCC report to the politicians was edited by non-scientists (and therefore has distortions).

But their actual data is straight from the horses mouth.

6/5/2007 2:34:00 PM

it's pretty obvious who blind hate is

6/5/2007 2:42:23 PM

you mean str8t from the horse's mouth, yet the horses later come in and say "i didn't take part in writing this report."

or do you mean that the data was taken straight but then manipulated by various politicians and gov'ts and "scientists" in order to meet their goals and agendas...

6/5/2007 3:24:01 PM

remember: only people who work with, for, or own stock in oil companies have vested interests in this...staying on a gasoline/oil energy economy keeps their pockets fat

its not like anyone stands to make billions of their own if the entire country feels the need to buy carbon credits and "clean" energy

6/5/2007 3:26:50 PM

nevermind the fact that carbon credits are little more than environmental snake oil

6/5/2007 3:33:25 PM

What report? The IPCC report?

Because that report has nothing to do with the fact that all major scientific organizations support anthropogenic climate change

6/5/2007 3:38:46 PM

nothing to do with it, huh? then how come you always cite it?

wasnt it the IPCC report that actually established the consensus? yet it has nothing to do with the consensus...

[Edited on June 5, 2007 at 3:51 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2007 3:49:39 PM

How many threads would you like me to cite that claim a consensus prior to the release of that report?

6/5/2007 3:53:30 PM

The IPCC Report was the first written consensus amongst the scientific community of human influence on climate change...so while you can provide some links to supposed consensus before then, they would essentially be worthless links

6/5/2007 4:00:40 PM

How many scientific organizations would you like me to cite that claimed consensus prior to the report?

In fact, here's how you can prove your point-- name me a single scientific organization that recognized the consensus only as a result of the report.

6/5/2007 4:07:08 PM

what good would citing one scientific organization do if we're looking for a consensus among all the organizations

6/5/2007 4:20:35 PM

I thought we were discussing this:

Quote :

"wasnt it the IPCC report that actually established the consensus?"

was that tangent intentional?

6/5/2007 4:27:24 PM

is a consensus some quantitative amount?

6/5/2007 4:41:38 PM

No.

When discussing whether or not scientific organizations accept the consensus or not, it's a yes/no thing.

6/5/2007 4:47:00 PM