Trying to use Science to spin a political agenda!

[Chorlton]

Forgive me if I get this wrong... but isn't that tantamount to letting an alleged criminal decide which evidence against him makes it into court?
Ray

Not much different than US idiots on CNN last night blaming ther Gulf Oil spill on to the 'British People'

[You Can Call Me Ray]

Forgive me if I get this wrong... but isn't that tantamount to letting an alleged criminal decide which evidence against him makes it into court?
Ray

Not much different than US idiots on CNN last night blaming ther Gulf Oil spill on to the 'British People'

Well, let's deconstruct that, because there are certainly parts I agree with and others I do not.

First the part I agree with: Yes, there are plenty of loud-mouthed idiots in all societies that get their face on the news spouting their ignorance. We seem to have a fair share here in the US (methinks the media doth actively seek them out), but there is certainly no shortage of them in the UK either! Especially as it surrounds the whole AGW scam.

The part I do NOT agree with: There is literally NO COMPARISON between a formal inquiry, which is intended to be fair, transparent, and whose results passed off as "the whole truth", and some nameless yahoo being interviewed on the street by the news media. NO COMPARISON, get that?

To prove there is no comparison, let me lay out what happened in detail:

1) The Oxburgh Inquiry was formed to assess what sorts of wrongdoing may have taken place as a result of the Climategate emails/data released last NOV.
2) Without question, one of the people identified as involved in the Climategate affair (because of his OWN EMAILS, which he never denied being his) was none other than Phil Jones, of EAU CRU. In other words, he was one of the subjects of the inquiry!
3) For him to have ANY sort of ability to influence what is admitted (or worse, rejected) as evidence for that inquiry is a travesty of the entire foundation of what that inquiry should be about! And don't even try to deny this.

So comparing the two is right out. Not a leg to stand on, old man!
Ray

[Chorlton]

Forgive me if I get this wrong... but isn't that tantamount to letting an alleged criminal decide which evidence against him makes it into court?
Ray

Not much different than US idiots on CNN last night blaming ther Gulf Oil spill on to the 'British People'

Well, let's deconstruct that, because there are certainly parts I agree with and others I do not.

First the part I agree with: Yes, there are plenty of loud-mouthed idiots in all societies that get their face on the news spouting their ignorance. We seem to have a fair share here in the US (methinks the media doth actively seek them out), but there is certainly no shortage of them in the UK either! Especially as it surrounds the whole AGW scam.

The part I do NOT agree with: There is literally NO COMPARISON between a formal inquiry, which is intended to be fair, transparent, and whose results passed off as "the whole truth", and some nameless yahoo being interviewed on the street by the news media. NO COMPARISON, get that?

To prove there is no comparison, let me lay out what happened in detail:

1) The Oxburgh Inquiry was formed to assess what sorts of wrongdoing may have taken place as a result of the Climategate emails/data released last NOV.
2) Without question, one of the people identified as involved in the Climategate affair (because of his OWN EMAILS, which he never denied being his) was none other than Phil Jones, of EAU CRU. In other words, he was one of the subjects of the inquiry!
3) For him to have ANY sort of ability to influence what is admitted (or worse, rejected) as evidence for that inquiry is a travesty of the entire foundation of what that inquiry should be about! And don't even try to deny this.

So comparing the two is right out. Not a leg to stand on, old man!
Ray

Well Hey ! my statement was half right?

[You Can Call Me Ray]

Well Hey ! my statement was half right?

Excellent. Then I shall clap for you with one hand.
Ray

[Chorlton]

Well Hey ! my statement was half right?

Excellent. Then I shall clap for you with one hand.
Ray

Just hang on untill I find another one armed man.

[You Can Call Me Ray]

The following is just one, small excerpt from a long article that accurately describes how we have become (by design) a country (USA) of "ruling class" and "ruled class". And make no mistake, the author clearly shows that the "ruling class" is eagerly staffed by both Democrats and Republicans. This excerpt is merely the pertinent discussion that lays out what has happened to science viz-a-viz "Anthropogenic Global Warming" as one part of how the ruling class has taken control and made it such that their will, not the will of the people, determines what is "right" and/or "truth".

If anyone wants the whole article, send me a PM with your email and I will gladly send it to you. If you are actually honest about being a centrist, and not wedded to one party or the other, then it could be a very enlightening read.

Excerpted from: America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution By Angelo M. Codevilla

While the unenlightened ones believe that man is created in the image and likeness of God and that we are subject to His and to His nature's laws, the enlightened ones know that we are products of evolution, driven by chance, the environment, and the will to primacy. While the un-enlightened are stuck with the antiquated notion that ordinary human minds can reach objective judgments about good and evil, better and worse through reason, the enlightened ones know that all such judgments are subjective and that ordinary people can no more be trusted with reason than they can with guns. Because ordinary people will pervert reason with ideology, religion, or interest, science is "science" only in the "right" hands. Consensus among the right people is the only standard of truth. Facts and logic matter only insofar as proper authority acknowledges them.

That is why the ruling class is united and adamant about nothing so much as its right to pronounce definitive, "scientific" judgment on whatever it chooses. When the government declares, and its associated press echoes that "scientists say" this or that, ordinary people -- or for that matter scientists who "don't say," or are not part of the ruling class -- lose any right to see the information that went into what "scientists say." Thus when Virginia's attorney general subpoenaed the data by which Professor Michael Mann had concluded, while paid by the state of Virginia, that the earth's temperatures are rising "like a hockey stick" from millennial stability -- a conclusion on which billions of dollars' worth of decisions were made -- to investigate the possibility of fraud, the University of Virginia's faculty senate condemned any inquiry into "scientific endeavor that has satisfied peer review standards" claiming that demands for data "send a chilling message to scientists...and indeed scholars in any discipline." The Washington Post editorialized that the attorney general's demands for data amounted to "an assault on reason." The fact that the "hockey stick" conclusion stands discredited and Mann and associates are on record manipulating peer review, the fact that science-by-secret-data is an oxymoron, the very distinction between truth and error, all matter far less to the ruling class than the distinction between itself and those they rule.

Ray

[You Can Call Me Ray]

I found the entire article online. This could easily becomes its own thread in this forum, but for now I will leave it here:

America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution By Angelo M. Codevilla

Ray

[Chorlton]

The answer is Democratic Socialism
Trust me !

[You Can Call Me Ray]

The answer is Democratic Socialism
Trust me !

Meh. Engineers don't trust, Chortlon. We verify and validate. So given that "Democratic Socialism" has never been successfully achieved, I will wait until someone else stumbles thru all the pitfalls before giving up my freedoms. Given that all governments (everywhere) breed corruption, then history has shown when you adopt socialist forms of governments that this makes it all that much easier for corruption to turn into absolute control. It permits consolidation of power by people who you generally do not want to have such power, because they abuse it.

So again...show me where it has been done successfully, first. No trusting.
Ray

[Chorlton]

The answer is Democratic Socialism
Trust me !

Meh. Engineers don't trust, Chortlon. We verify and validate. So given that "Democratic Socialism" has never been successfully achieved, I will wait until someone else stumbles thru all the pitfalls before giving up my freedoms. Given that all governments (everywhere) breed corruption, then history has shown when you adopt socialist forms of governments that this makes it all that much easier for corruption to turn into absolute control. It permits consolidation of power by people who you generally do not want to have such power, because they abuse it.
So again...show me where it has been done successfully, first. No trusting.
Ray

But true Democratic Socialism isnt what you consider to be Socialist. Its a system where the people are put first.
The reason it hasnt been fully tried is due to the Politicians losing what they see as a form of control.
The UK and its counties, with their County Councils is a mild form of Democratic Socialism. But, like all politics, it gets corrupted very quickly with County Councils assuming we are there to serve them and they are there to make the rules.
I caused uproar at Hampshire County Council last month when I demanded entry to a 'Closed' Council meeting. I was refused and called the police. I showed them the local Council Act where they had no right to refuse me entry to any meeting except on Security affairs. And as they dont have any say on Security matters even that is irrelevant. They were forced to let me in and immediately abandoned the meeting. THATS the problem with Politicians. They become self serving entities and forget the basis of democracy. They are there to serve US, to implement that which we tell them to implement. If they choose to implement their own ideas without consultation from us then they should be financially responsible for all their cock ups. If they arent confident in that then they should resign.

France's form of basic Socialism is admirable. The Government makes the rules and laws. The local Mayories and councills then tell them to f---- off and do it their way based on Local conditions. This way The local boys control and do what is right for Locals and leave the twats in Paris to dick about with International matters.

[You Can Call Me Ray]

But true Democratic Socialism isnt what you consider to be Socialist. Its a system where the people are put first.

Doesn't matter. It still opens the door MUCH more widely to corruption and to political idealogues taking over and imposing their will. ALL such efforts eventually lead to these types of people gaining control over the military, and once that happens...game over. See Hugo Chavez for evidence.

But, like all politics, it gets corrupted very quickly with County Councils assuming we are there to serve them and they are there to make the rules.

(snip)

THATS the problem with Politicians. They become self serving entities and forget the basis of democracy.

Exactly my points. By its very nature, socialism (and you can prepend whatever pretty word to the front that you want, it doesn't change my point one iota) concentrates power in a way that (1) APPEARS to be good for the people, but also (2) allows for the inevitable lust for power over other humans to turn into absolute control. And at the same time it opens the doors to rampant corruption via centralized control, it also destroys incentives to do hard work and succeed. In essence, socialism completely ignores a fundamental aspect of human nature: competition.

Why Socialism Failed

In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.

And the fundamental thing that causes socialism (in any form, with any prefix you like) to fail is also stated here:

Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.

(snip)

A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don’t matter!

Ray

[Chorlton]

Well adding things up, and from what Ive seen of your pretty corrupt system where votes are bought and sold, I'd prefer our system.
My only gripe is that the people should be allowed to vote for who is to become prime Minister. The present system is wrong in that respect.

[You Can Call Me Ray]

Energy Bill a No-Go in the Senate

Senate Democrats on Tuesday abandoned all hopes of passing even a slimmed-down energy bill before they adjourn for the summer recess, saying that they did not have sufficient votes even for legislation tailored narrowly to respond to the Gulf oil spill.

Yeah, time to wake up to reality.

Although the majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, sought to blame Republicans for sinking the energy measure, the reality is that Democrats are also divided over how to proceed on the issue and had long ago given up hope of a comprehensive bill to address climate change.

Yep. One party blames the other. But the reality of the situation is that people are now seeing the lies and half-truths that were promulgated by career politicians like Al Gore. In reality, the scientific truth is winning out. And yes, there is evidence to back it. Here, take a look at the latest temperature anomaly chart:


CO2 levels have increased since the late 90s, but has there been any warming along the lines as predicted by Mann's "Hockey Stick"? Nope.com. And isn't it interesting how the El Nino pattern that we are just coming out of (La Nina is firmly seen to be taking hold in the eastern Pacific) looks almost identical, from a temp. anomaly standpoint, as the last El Nino pattern in 1998-1999? Yep...climate is changing...as it always has, and always will (if we are lucky). But back to the article:

“Ask anyone outside of Washington, and they’ll tell you that this isn’t a Democrat or a Republican issue, it’s an American issue,” Mr. Kerry said. “It’s American troops whose lives are endangered because we’re dependent on oil companies in countries that hate us. It’s American consumers who are tired not just of prices at the pump that soar each summer, but sick and tired of our oil dependency that makes Iran $100 million richer every day that Washington fails to respond.”

Sounds like someone is campaigning already! Mmmmm, yes...so Mr. Kerry, I have a question for you: How come the Department of Energy (created under Carter with the express mission to wean us off foreign oil) is not doing its job? Carter created it, it lived and grew through Regan and Bush I, then Clinton got it and did nothing with it, and it even continued to live through Bush II right into the present Obama administration. How much money has that government department wasted, with nothing to show as a result? (And I mean nothing to show for the express purpose it was created... I am sure it has spent plenty of pork it feels good about!).

Ray

[You Can Call Me Ray]

Well adding things up, and from what Ive seen of your pretty corrupt system where votes are bought and sold, I'd prefer our system.

You say that as if you believe your system does not suffer from the same problem. "Politics are corrupt." It is a fact of life that will not change. Just like "people murder other people." We can argue about the level of corruption in either of our systems, and that is influenced as much by the culture of a people and how they demand (or even if they demand) to be governed, as much as by a whole host of other factors, which includes the form of government.

What I would call note to is the fact that you decided to not address the issue of incentive, competition, and the natural state of humans to be competetive and to respond to incentive. This is the primary issue that all articles highlight when they point out the failure of prior socialist attempts. The answer from those who wish to continue trying different forms of socialism can always be generalized into a single response that essentially goes like this: "Well, yeah, but that was because they didn't do socialism right." That is a non-answer to the point of incentive.

Show me where the incentive is in your "Democratic Socialist model." And if you say something like "the incentive is that we all work together to make a better life for all", while it sounds good it still ignores the nature of the human as a singular beast FIRST AND FOREMOST, and then a social beast when personal needs are met. Maslow's Needs 101.

Ray

[You Can Call Me Ray]

So...ummmmmm, yes, well I am sure most of us here have all heard about and seen the "10:10" video about what the AGW zealots think is good PR for their cause...



Kind of really lets you know what this movement is really all about, huh? Certainly not science! If you don't think like us, we just blow you up! Problem solved.

So who here on RU still doesn't believe in AGW? No pressure!
Ray