tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post8301084864184569939..comments2024-03-26T15:37:57.556-07:00Comments on Idiot Tracker: Curry, Burgess-Jackson & Pangloss (2011)TheTrackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10011829472333355911noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post-85295471162848994032012-05-25T04:48:04.045-07:002012-05-25T04:48:04.045-07:00Great post. I am really pleased to post my comment...Great post. I am really pleased to post my comment on this blog thanks<br /><a href="http://ductcleaningflorida.com/air-duct-cleaning-west-park-fl/" rel="nofollow"> ac duct cleaning West Park fl </a>Adminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00931667808516627082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post-74989402430493385592011-12-31T15:37:03.031-08:002011-12-31T15:37:03.031-08:00No that surprising. It's only a half-step bey...No that surprising. It's only a half-step beyond Hulme's line of crap, e.g.Steve Bloomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post-70804009917371748692011-12-31T02:23:10.830-08:002011-12-31T02:23:10.830-08:00AD: "There is an even more basic problem with...AD: "There is an even more basic problem with the argument: He never enumerates his list of proposed benefits to global warming."<br /><br />They rarely do, for good reason -- the "benefits" are either trivial or highly speculative. And to assert anything positive runs contrary to the whole "we don't know anything" meme.<br /><br />What we have here is something infinitely more stupid: the assertion, as a matter of PRINCIPLE, that where there is bad there must be good, that where there is harm there must be benefits, and therefore SCIENTISTS ARE COMMITTING FRAUD!<br /><br />It's kind of a fallacy of the Golden Mean on steroids, being recounted by a paranoid.<br /><br />Also, thanks for reading!<br /><br />Anon: "Disruptions have negative consequences."<br /><br />Exactly. I've written about this here many times. You can't treat a massively complex ecosystem evolved over billions of years as if it were a roulette wheel, and an extra spin carried an equal chance of making the outcome better or worse. It's arrant nonsense.<br /><br />Richard: "Posting this nonsense at Curry's site is irresponsible."<br /><br />We should reserve that for the stuff she print she doesn't believe (she has, to her credit, started to label this stuff more explicitly.) She actually seems to be persuaded by this dreck, which is very strange, to say the least.TheTrackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10011829472333355911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post-55793679234576960922011-12-30T18:17:49.691-08:002011-12-30T18:17:49.691-08:00Anyone who believes such absurdities, as in Curry&...Anyone who believes such absurdities, as in Curry's post, is someone who thinks - "a few degrees warmer? A little change in the weather? Big deal"<br /><br /> It's like thinking you're about to be hit by a bicycle, when it's really a freight train coming. A world likely never experienced by humans.<br /><br /> Posting this nonsense at Curry's site is irresponsible.Richard Mercerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12562319064021702411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post-36681954268332757322011-12-30T11:57:36.061-08:002011-12-30T11:57:36.061-08:00Hi, I'm enjoying your blog. Good work!
Keep i...Hi, I'm enjoying your blog. Good work!<br /><br />Keep in mind that the type of argument you are debunking is born of pure rhetoric. In Shakespeare's Hamlet, he writes "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."<br /><br />This is the same argument, which basically excuses the obligation to think about consequences. He uses the term 'rational people' while avoiding the term 'responsible people'.<br /><br />There is an even more basic problem with the argument: He never enumerates his list of proposed benefits to global warming. Thus, we see that his real interest lies in extending the debate, not in finding answers. Oh, and avoiding Action (if it exists).<br /><br />Debunked.<br /><br />Cheers,<br />LodgerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6718772691289114123.post-33944438654664220622011-12-30T09:12:46.013-08:002011-12-30T09:12:46.013-08:00Nicely put. I appreciate your insights cutting th...Nicely put. I appreciate your insights cutting through to the core of a lot of blather.<br />Also, natural and human systems evolved or were created for the climate of the recent past. So any change from that climate, whether warmer or colder, wetter or dryer, would cause a disruption. Disruptions have negative consequences. Even if one could weigh the pluses and minuses of the climate of your area 100 years from now, the trajectory is not from climate A to climate B, but rather one of continual change. So the climate of 2100 will likely only be briefly passed through on the way to more warming.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com