Kinda funny

Access Norton Pub (no politics) ? I must have entered the wrong pub.
 
Boss302 said:
Access Norton Pub (no politics) ? I must have entered the wrong pub.
Click to expand...

Hard to view this as a political debate when the topic is science/geology...or maybe you call it politics because it has been presented as such for so long.

I spent 4 years at a university studying Historical Geology. We studied the science of geology. Weathering and geologic activities and its behavior and its well defined cycles over the past eons. Its all out there and easy to read if you know what to look for.
One of my deer hunting buddies is the Professor of Historical Geology at Washington University in St. Louis. He will not enter into a discussion on planet health, too many uninformed. Too many short term limited knowledge experts with no clue as to how uneducated they really are.

The planet will be just fine regardless of the claims some junior high student or Al (I helped invent the internet) Gore claims to possess with their self declared and privileged insight into the immediate geologic activities of this rock we reside on.

The uninformed predictions about what geological influence occurs next (to the air for instance) presented by so many self declared experts is not science .
Our big ball of partially solidified gas and particles will be just fine regardless of how huge the self-important human race considers its miniscule influences to be.

Note that it didn't take long for some innovative and creative thinking politicians/experts/opportunists to convert a scientific observation into a socially influenced priority issue and then create a mandate out of it to then capitalize on the entire "We are killing the planet" scenario to the tune of billions and billions of dollars.

Now if China and N. Korea and Russia and Mexico, South America and a few others keep belching out the same atmospheric crap they have been it will have an influence. Same with the never ending culling of the rain forest...it will have an influence.
And it will take hundreds of years for that influence to come about...not next April.
Consider this. When Mt. St. Helens blew it put more particulate material into the atmosphere than all of industrialized man had. From the turn of the century to the day the mountain blew .

But for now most any geologic activity is called man made and is most assuredly the responsibility of man and industrial progress...depending on which channel you watch or website you subscribe to.
 
My sister worked at a art gallery for years
..when it was trendy to have a save the planet/whales etc....print...she would ask what picture frame timber would the customer like...alot of them choose the mahogany as they liked the look...

To bad it was from the Amazon rain Forrest....some of these people have hypoxic starved brain cells ...im am sure....
 
Lineslinger said:
Hard to view this as a political debate when the topic is science/geology...or maybe you call it politics because it has been presented as such for so long.

I spent 4 years at a university studying Historical Geology. We studied the science of geology. Weathering and geologic activities and its behavior and its well defined cycles over the past eons. Its all out there and easy to read if you know what to look for.
One of my deer hunting buddies is the Professor of Historical Geology at Washington University in St. Louis. He will not enter into a discussion on planet health, too many uninformed. Too many short term limited knowledge experts with no clue as to how uneducated they really are.

The planet will be just fine regardless of the claims some junior high student or Al (I helped invent the internet) Gore claims to possess with their self declared and privileged insight into the immediate geologic activities of this rock we reside on.

The uninformed predictions about what geological influence occurs next (to the air for instance) presented by so many self declared experts is not science .
Our big ball of partially solidified gas and particles will be just fine regardless of how huge the self-important human race considers its miniscule influences to be.

Note that it didn't take long for some innovative and creative thinking politicians/experts/opportunists to convert a scientific observation into a socially influenced priority issue and then create a mandate out of it to then capitalize on the entire "We are killing the planet" scenario to the tune of billions and billions of dollars.

Now if China and N. Korea and Russia and Mexico, South America and a few others keep belching out the same atmospheric crap they have been it will have an influence. Same with the never ending culling of the rain forest...it will have an influence.
And it will take hundreds of years for that influence to come about...not next April.
Consider this. When Mt. St. Helens blew it put more particulate material into the atmosphere than all of industrialized man had. From the turn of the century to the day the mountain blew .

But for now most any geologic activity is called man made and is most assuredly the responsibility of man and industrial progress...depending on which channel you watch or website you subscribe to.
Click to expand...
You got through one paragraph before it became political. You made it quite clear what your politics are. In todays angry political climate it is not possible to have a civil discussion about climate, guns, and any number of other politically charged topics. The only climate discussion I would expect to see in a forum that is clearly labels no politics is how beautiful it is here in the American southwest and how I can ride my motorcycle almost 365 days per year here. Plenty of forums out there to discuss politically charged topics. I didn't expect it to be here in a Norton Motorcycle forum.
 
concours said:
This is healthy dialog, this stuff matters.
Affects us, out children, our grands
Click to expand...
Nothing healthy about insults and angry political rhetoric. A scientific discussion would include data from both sides free of insulting a teenaged girl who is genuinely concerned about the world she will be living in. Let's respect the intent of the forum which is expressly and clearly labeled as nonpolitical.
 
Boss302 said:
Nothing healthy about insults and angry political rhetoric. A scientific discussion would include data from both sides free of insulting a teenaged girl who is genuinely concerned about the world she will be living in. Let's respect the intent of the forum which is expressly and clearly labeled as nonpolitical.
Click to expand...
The beauty of the pub is it takes traffic from elsewhere
Jerry dosent want politics
There's no need for any politics
And like any pub the door opens and closes
You can choose to go in
Or choose to leave
 
Boss302 said:
You got through one paragraph before it became political. You made it quite clear what your politics are. In todays angry political climate it is not possible to have a civil discussion about climate, guns, and any number of other politically charged topics. The only climate discussion I would expect to see in a forum that is clearly labels no politics is how beautiful it is here in the American southwest and how I can ride my motorcycle almost 365 days per year here. Plenty of forums out there to discuss politically charged topics. I didn't expect it to be here in a Norton Motorcycle forum.
Click to expand...

The climate subject is such a politically charged issue most tend to react to what they hear or read based on their emotions related to the subject.
Thus my comments on TV channels and website preference.

I was, in no way trying to advocate any kind of political stance, regardless of any judgmental interpretations from you.
Read the post.
I did, sarcastically, in this bar, throw out a follow up using two names previously mentioned, who...in my opinion, choose to use said subject to further their personal and financial gain.
Through my studies and learned friends on the topic I have a semblance of insight into the topic. My words were my humble attempt to simply share what I learned in a scholastic, science based environment over many years and still today.

Now, if you want to start pointing fingers and passing judgement on who's writings or observations are politically charged and who's are not, I for one would like to see where that takes you.
But just because your expectations on "how it should be" were not addressed on the level you mandate does not make them wrong...just different, one more opinion.
Yeah, sometimes a bit of politics sneaks in when observations being advocated. And, as stated previously in here, it is a bar.
That is what a moderator moderates.
Opinions and conversations tend to wander and vary. Sometimes a lot.
The political labels you seem to be so concerned with applying to the other participants in this discussion are your sole interpretation, and yours only.
 
Lineslinger said:
The climate subject is such a politically charged issue most tend to react to what they hear or read based on their emotions related to the subject.
Thus my comments on TV channels and website preference.

I was, in no way trying to advocate any kind of political stance, regardless of any judgmental interpretations from you.
Read the post.
I did, sarcastically, in this bar, throw out a follow up using two names previously mentioned, who...in my opinion, choose to use said subject to further their personal and financial gain.
Through my studies and learned friends on the topic I have a semblance of insight into the topic. My words were my humble attempt to simply share what I learned in a scholastic, science based environment over many years and still today.

Now, if you want to start pointing fingers and passing judgement on who's writings or observations are politically charged and who's are not, I for one would like to see where that takes you.
But just because your expectations on "how it should be" were not addressed on the level you mandate does not make them wrong...just different, one more opinion.
Yeah, sometimes a bit of politics sneaks in when observations being advocated. And, as stated previously in here, it is a bar.
That is what a moderator moderates.
Opinions and conversations tend to wander and vary. Sometimes a lot.
The political labels you seem to be so concerned with applying to the other participants in this discussion are your sole interpretation, and yours only.
Click to expand...
A bit of politics? Really? Go above and read the quality of the comments most of which have no scientific backing and are just political expressions of disgust and vitriol. Also here's the response for your observation about Mt St Helen's straight from the US geological socienty. "There is no question that very large volcanic eruptions can inject significant amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens vented approximately 10 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere in only 9 hours. However, it currently takes humanity only 2.5 hours to put out the same amount. While large explosive eruptions like this are rare and only occur globally every 10 years or so, humanity's emissions are ceaseless and increasing every year."
My education is in biology undergrad and medicine graduate along with 35 years practice in emergency medicine and disability. A good scientific discussion includes not only credentials but also biases and conflicts of interest. That stated now as before my intent is to have people follow the forum guidelines and omit politics from this forum (no politics). It cannot be defended that this forum has not eroded into an uninformed political insult session. Can we do better? I would like to see the site administrators assessment of misuse of this forum. Any monitors around? If the content of the numerous comments about politicized climate change are appropriate in their conclusion then I'll accept that and move on.
 
I think it's time to get out of the pub, get on your bikes and we all go for a ride, enjoy the ride and not think about what all the so call experts think.
There are more things happening around the world to worry about climate change it's just another thing taking our mind off other issues, at lease we are doing less harm riding our bikes and the planet will survive from climate change but will it survive from power hungry nations, dictators or who all have the power to kill everyone with a press of a button.
Going for a ride might be the best thing to do as everything is out of my hands, but don't ride if you had a few drinks at the pub, things won't change unless every country in the world gets together and work together but that will never happen.
 
Boss302 said:
A bit of politics? Really? Go above and read the quality of the comments most of which have no scientific backing and are just political expressions of disgust and vitriol. Also here's the response for your observation about Mt St Helen's straight from the US geological socienty. "There is no question that very large volcanic eruptions can inject significant amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens vented approximately 10 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere in only 9 hours. However, it currently takes humanity only 2.5 hours to put out the same amount. While large explosive eruptions like this are rare and only occur globally every 10 years or so, humanity's emissions are ceaseless and increasing every year."
My education is in biology undergrad and medicine graduate along with 35 years practice in emergency medicine and disability. A good scientific discussion includes not only credentials but also biases and conflicts of interest. That stated now as before my intent is to have people follow the forum guidelines and omit politics from this forum (no politics). It cannot be defended that this forum has not eroded into an uninformed political insult session. Can we do better? I would like to see the site administrators assessment of misuse of this forum. Any monitors around? If the content of the numerous comments about politicized climate change are appropriate in their conclusion then I'll accept that and move on.
Click to expand...

Again...Read the actual post Post, your self serving interpretation is not what was stated.
Hint: Gas vs. Particulate...

Accuracy counts.
So do details.

"my intent is to have people follow the forum guidelines and omit politics from this forum (no politics). It cannot be defended that this forum has not eroded into an uninformed political insult session."

I guess I missed the part where you were elected as a moderator.

I hope your intent to have your fellow participants follow your interpretation/lead of forum guideline fixation works out for you.
 
Last edited:
ashman said:
I think it's time to get out of the pub, get on your bikes and we all go for a ride, enjoy the ride and not think about what all the so call experts think.
There are more things happening around the world to worry about climate change it's just another thing taking our mind off other issues, at lease we are doing less harm riding our bikes and the planet will survive from climate change but will it survive from power hungry nations, dictators or who all have the power to kill everyone with a press of a button.
Going for a ride might be the best thing to do as everything is out of my hands, but don't ride if you had a few drinks at the pub, things won't change unless every country in the world gets together and work together but that will never happen.
Click to expand...

Enjoy your ride bro.
Kinda funny
 
Last edited:
Boss302 said:
Nothing healthy about insults and angry political rhetoric. A scientific discussion would include data from both sides free of insulting a teenaged girl who is genuinely concerned about the world she will be living in. Let's respect the intent of the forum which is expressly and clearly labeled as nonpolitical.
Click to expand...
What you mean is, simply, that anyone with a viewpoint different that yours is not allowed to voice/type it.
Clearly, yours is a thinly veiled attempt to stir up a shitstorm.
What if you offered some meaningful insights?
 
texasSlick said:
Where does your data come from? Can you provide even one reference to substantiate that 100% claim? If not, you are just another internet armchair expert.

Slick
Click to expand...
NASA: "Human Activity Is the Cause of Increased Greenhouse Gas Concentrations" which is in turn the cause of global heating. Full story from NASA is here https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

If you reckon you know more about climatology than the scientists at NASA, please post a copy of your doctoral dissertation.

Myself, I struggled to get through first year Physics at college so don't claim that level of expertise in the hard sciences.
The idea that a bunch of internet armchair pogues like us can analyse the data and draw meaningful conclusions on such a complex system is laughable if you understand how science works at all. We might as well all be analysing the data and coming up with our own conclusions on how to build and run a nuclear power station or build a better Hadron particle accelerator. Both of which are very small, simple systems compared with the global environmental system.

Do you really think you could do a better job of designing and running a nuclear power station than a squad of folks with PhDs in Nuclear Physics??? Of course not. But climate science, hey everyone's an expert. They may not know what latent heat is, or understand Boyle's Law, or adiabatic expansion or isothermal compression, or be able to explain the thermodynamics of how their kitchen refrigerator works, but hey they sure know more than those dumb scientists about the thermodynamics of the global ecosystem.

(Not that this has anything to do with Greta Thunberg. She is just a media stunt. )
 
Last edited:
HopperXL said:
NASA: "Human Activity Is the Cause of Increased Greenhouse Gas Concentrations" which is in turn the cause of global heating. Full story from NASA is here https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

If you reckon you know more about climatology than the scientists at NASA, please post a copy of your doctoral dissertation.

Myself, I struggled to get through first year Physics at college so don't claim that level of expertise in the hard sciences.
The idea that a bunch of internet armchair pogues like us can analyse the data and draw meaningful conclusions on such a complex system is laughable if you understand how science works at all. We might as well all be analysing the data and coming up with our own conclusions on how to build and run a nuclear power station or build a better Hadron particle accelerator. Both of which are very small, simple systems compared with the global environmental system.

Do you really think you could do a better job of designing and running a nuclear power station than a squad of folks with PhDs in Nuclear Physics??? Of course not. But climate science, hey everyone's an expert. They may not know what latent heat is, or understand Boyle's Law, or adiabatic expansion or isothermal compression, or be able to explain the thermodynamics of how their kitchen refrigerator works, but hey they sure know more than those dumb scientists about the thermodynamics of the global ecosystem.
Click to expand...
NASA predicted the coming ice age in 1971
Then the media latched on just as they did with global warming
And now climate change
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top