Page 60 of 69 FirstFirst ... 10505859606162 ... LastLast
Results 591 to 600 of 690

Thread: The effects of warming: Kilodeaths

  1. Top | #591
    the baby-eater
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Straya
    Posts
    3,835
    Archived
    1,750
    Total Posts
    5,585
    Rep Power
    38
    Angelo's just slinging shit. His arguments contradict each other so much that there's no possible way he can agree with all of them.

  2. Top | #592
    Elder Contributor angelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    11,775
    Archived
    5,706
    Total Posts
    17,481
    Rep Power
    59
    Like i said. A cult like following like no other! Makes Scientology and Mormonism look like harmless fun.

  3. Top | #593
    the baby-eater
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Straya
    Posts
    3,835
    Archived
    1,750
    Total Posts
    5,585
    Rep Power
    38
    You can't get your story straight on any detail. Each fake expert you vomit up tells a different story than the one before. Clearly you don't care if they're right, so long as they're on your side of the culture war.

    You've truly lost your way when you're calling the scientific establishment a cult.

  4. Top | #594
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    22,024
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    32,501
    Rep Power
    85
    I propose a new law of online debate, Bilby's Law, which states:

    The use of a video or cartoon in support of a scientific point is a clear indication that the person providing that medium has insufficient understanding of the topic to usefully participate in the debate.

    Seriously, I am increasingly convinced that the most direct measure of a person's intelligence online is to be found by study of the ratio of written arguments to video, meme, and cartoon postings. A video is an excellent way to make an argument (that could be expressed in a handful of sentences) take several minutes - perhaps even an hour or more - to convey. The information density of such media is incredibly low; While the depth of knowledge conveyed is almost always practically zero.

    Presenting video evidence in a debate is a strong indication that the person doing so has only the most superficial understanding, as any person with a deep grasp of a topic will invariably choose to convey their knowledge through text (with perhaps an occasional well designed graph) - if only because this is the only way to disseminate large volumes of information in a reasonable amount of time.

    Using a thirty minute YouTube clip to present a single concept to your audience is a massive waste of their time - and therefore a clear indication that your own knowledge extends almost nowhere beyond that single concept.

  5. Top | #595
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    25,721
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    68,194
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    I propose a new law of online debate, Bilby's Law, which states:

    The use of a video or cartoon in support of a scientific point is a clear indication that the person providing that medium has insufficient understanding of the topic to usefully participate in the debate.
    I already came up with Higgins Postulate indicating that the value of a position is inversely proportional as to whether a YouTube Video was used to defend it.

  6. Top | #596
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,599
    Rep Power
    14
    There is an old saying about communicating. If you are speaking to people knowing nothing about what you are saying speak like they are 3rd graders.

    To reach the people that need to be reached on climate change animations cooed be effective. Visual can bypasses thought processes It is the basis of advertising.

    Logic debate will always fail. What is needed is a regular advertising campaign.

  7. Top | #597
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    25,995
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    122,747
    Rep Power
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    Here's the best argument yet of why GW/CC/CD is nothing more than a latter day cult, or the biggest hoax since xtianity's or even worse, Islam's founding all those years years ago.


    Epic fail on your part--this is explaining why the greenhouse effect is real!

  8. Top | #598
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    25,995
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    122,747
    Rep Power
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    I propose a new law of online debate, Bilby's Law, which states:

    The use of a video or cartoon in support of a scientific point is a clear indication that the person providing that medium has insufficient understanding of the topic to usefully participate in the debate.

    Seriously, I am increasingly convinced that the most direct measure of a person's intelligence online is to be found by study of the ratio of written arguments to video, meme, and cartoon postings. A video is an excellent way to make an argument (that could be expressed in a handful of sentences) take several minutes - perhaps even an hour or more - to convey. The information density of such media is incredibly low; While the depth of knowledge conveyed is almost always practically zero.

    Presenting video evidence in a debate is a strong indication that the person doing so has only the most superficial understanding, as any person with a deep grasp of a topic will invariably choose to convey their knowledge through text (with perhaps an occasional well designed graph) - if only because this is the only way to disseminate large volumes of information in a reasonable amount of time.

    Using a thirty minute YouTube clip to present a single concept to your audience is a massive waste of their time - and therefore a clear indication that your own knowledge extends almost nowhere beyond that single concept.
    A video of a person speaking I will agree with you on. Sometimes videos are useful to convey graphical information, though.

  9. Top | #599
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    11,875
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    30,088
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    A video of a person speaking I will agree with you on. Sometimes videos are useful to convey graphical information, though.
    NOPE


  10. Top | #600
    Elder Contributor angelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    11,775
    Archived
    5,706
    Total Posts
    17,481
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfield View Post
    You can't get your story straight on any detail. Each fake expert you vomit up tells a different story than the one before. Clearly you don't care if they're right, so long as they're on your side of the culture war.

    You've truly lost your way when you're calling the scientific establishment a cult.
    What's that do to the claimed 97% consensus ?

    This video uncovers the in-depth story behind the climate fraud.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •