Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 9:15:10 GMT
If you think I am the problem you clearly understand very little. Thunberg is not a leader, just one of the most high profile campaigners. Yet for telling you that truth I am supposedly part of some cult that usually only exists in the heads of climate change deniers. I do not even follow Thunberg myself. I tend to get my information from books, TV and radio documentaries, and New Scientist magazine which I buy every week. I might suggest the latter for you as a source of science education, rather than using Thunberg's existence as an excuse not to listen to the scientists, which truly is intellectually feeble. You are the most unconvincing supposedly believer in AGW that I have ever met and doubt that it is true. Thunberg is the face of the climate change campaign . Don’t try to deny it . She is far , far more well known that any climate scientist. Once again you call me a denier because I question who is the head of a campaign but not the basis of the campaign . Classic cultist reaction . Every time you post . She may be better known than any scientist, but her high profile in combination with her youth clearly offends you. Young people are supposed to be too stupid or too disinterested to bother campaigning about anything. But she is using her high profile as a campaigner to warn us about the dangers of climate change, but she is not inventing the problem but directing us towards the science. If you don't like her, ignore her and find the science yourself. You are using her as an excuse. And that is typical denialist behaviour, as is calling those of us who believe that AGW is real cultists. I thus doubt your honesty, so ask again. How did you vote in Zany's poll? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 9:23:19 GMT
Thunberg is the face of the climate change campaign . Don’t try to deny it . She is far , far more well known that any climate scientist. Once again you call me a denier because I question who is the head of a campaign but not the basis of the campaign . Classic cultist reaction . Every time you post . She may be better known than any scientist, but her high profile in combination with her youth clearly offends you. Young people are supposed to be too stupid or too disinterested to bother campaigning about anything. But she is using her high profile as a campaigner to warn us about the dangers of climate change, but she is not inventing the problem but directing us towards the science. If you don't like her, ignore her and find the science yourself. You are using her as an excuse. And that is typical denialist behaviour, as is calling those of us who believe that AGW is real cultists. I thus doubt your honesty, so ask again. How did you vote in Zany's poll? Another false claim…now she ‘ offends me ‘, I ‘ don’t like her’ and the same old false claim that I am a denialist because I believe that a scientist should lead the net zero campaign rather than an unqualified teenager . I repeat , you are the problem . You have had pages of opportunity to discuss the positives and negatives of a real scientist being the face of net zero but instead of that you have posted false claims and straw men ..classic cultist behaviour. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 9:26:11 GMT
Note that two posters on here claim that questioning an unqualified teenager as head of a campaign based on science instead of a scientist equates to denying the science . Strange . That is absolute rubbish as usual. Zany can speak for himself but I do not follow Thunberg. I seek out the science for myself. Thunberg is just another person doing the same who has chosen to campaign on the issue from a very young age which is what gave her the high profile she has in the first place. She is though just a campaigner and not the leader of any cult or organisation. All she is trying to do is raise awareness in regards to what the scientists are saying. You recoil in horror from the fact that some kid dares to campaign for what she believes in. Lets be clear here. No one is forcing you to listen to her. I have made no argument that you do so. Just seek out and listen to the science and stop using her as an excuse not to. The science after all is independent of her and in no way controlled by her. She is a powerless individual in command of nothing. All she has is a voice and a relatively high profile amongst younger people. But someone so young is always going to fall foul of the elderly ageists around here. I don't see why you even pay her any attention, and using her as an excuse to ignore the science is very intellectually unpersuasive. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 9:29:44 GMT
Note that two posters on here claim that questioning an unqualified teenager as head of a campaign based on science instead of a scientist equates to denying the science . Strange . That is absolute rubbish as usual. Zany can speak for himself but I do not follow Thunberg. I seek out the science for myself. Thunberg is just another person doing the same who has chosen to campaign on the issue from a very young age which is what gave her the high profile she has in the first place. She is though just a campaigner and not the leader of any cult or organisation. All she is trying to do is raise awareness in regards to what the scientists are saying. You recoil in horror from the fact that some kid dares to campaign for what she believes in. Lets be clear here. No one is forcing you to listen to her. I have made no argument that you do so. Just seek out and listen to the science and stop using her as an excuse not to. The science after all is independent of her and in no way controlled by her. She is a powerless individual in command of nothing. All she has is a voice and a relatively high profile amongst younger people. But someone so young is always going to fall foul of the elderly ageists around here. I don't see why you even pay her any attention, and using her as an excuse to ignore the science is very intellectually unpersuasive. Still making false claims and assumptions I see. You are merely supporting my point. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 9:37:09 GMT
She may be better known than any scientist, but her high profile in combination with her youth clearly offends you. Young people are supposed to be too stupid or too disinterested to bother campaigning about anything. But she is using her high profile as a campaigner to warn us about the dangers of climate change, but she is not inventing the problem but directing us towards the science. If you don't like her, ignore her and find the science yourself. You are using her as an excuse. And that is typical denialist behaviour, as is calling those of us who believe that AGW is real cultists. I thus doubt your honesty, so ask again. How did you vote in Zany's poll? Another false claim…now she ‘ offends me ‘, I ‘ don’t like her’ and the same old false claim that I am a denialist because I believe that a scientist should lead the net zero campaign rather than an unqualified teenager . I repeat , you are the problem . You have had pages of opportunity to discuss the positives and negatives of a real scientist being the face of net zero but instead of that you have posted false claims and straw men ..classic cultist behaviour. Every post I have made in which I have discussed the real science you have ignored, and chosen only to use this thread as a vehicle for attacking a prominent but youthful campaigner who believes in the reality of the same AGW you claim to believe in. And you seem reluctant to tell us how you voted in Zany's poll. How did you vote in it by the way? Your unwillingness to answer merely feeds the suspicion that you might not believe in the reality of AGW at all, but are just saying you do as a way of avoiding criticism. But I am all for discussing the science. It is what I was doing here before you came along to make it all about Thunberg and calling us cultists. If you want to ignore Thunberg who is an irrelevance anyway beyond the fact that some young people listen to her and actually discuss the science, I will be happy to discuss it with you. But unlike Zany and myself and some of our critics, you haven't even begun to discuss the actual science yet. If you do so we might have an intelligent discussion |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 9:40:30 GMT
That is absolute rubbish as usual. Zany can speak for himself but I do not follow Thunberg. I seek out the science for myself. Thunberg is just another person doing the same who has chosen to campaign on the issue from a very young age which is what gave her the high profile she has in the first place. She is though just a campaigner and not the leader of any cult or organisation. All she is trying to do is raise awareness in regards to what the scientists are saying. You recoil in horror from the fact that some kid dares to campaign for what she believes in. Lets be clear here. No one is forcing you to listen to her. I have made no argument that you do so. Just seek out and listen to the science and stop using her as an excuse not to. The science after all is independent of her and in no way controlled by her. She is a powerless individual in command of nothing. All she has is a voice and a relatively high profile amongst younger people. But someone so young is always going to fall foul of the elderly ageists around here. I don't see why you even pay her any attention, and using her as an excuse to ignore the science is very intellectually unpersuasive. Still making false claims and assumptions I see. You are merely supporting my point. The only point you are successfully making is the silliness and obvious disingenuousness of your own arguments. Are you ever going to tell us how you voted in Zany's poll? Or would an honest answer to that question expose you as a liar? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 9:47:42 GMT
I give up with these two but my point stands .
The public need to be on board with the eco worriers regarding AGW and for that you need a campaign headed by an eminent scientist ( or a team) who can proffer a compelling argument .
That argument should be pressed on the public by reasoned debate ….relentlessly
What we have now is a group of virtue signallers who want to pontificate, lead by an unqualified teenager .
If the science is there , the public will not search for it . It won’t happen . The debate should be taken out of the hands of the cultists and pub bores and given to the scientific community.
The AGW campaign is a farce . The authorities didn’t roll out a teenage poppet to tell us how dangerous COVID was during the covid crisis while the ‘ experts ‘ told us to go find the details ourselves .
That’s what the eco worriers are doing today .
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 9:51:45 GMT
Another false claim…now she ‘ offends me ‘, I ‘ don’t like her’ and the same old false claim that I am a denialist because I believe that a scientist should lead the net zero campaign rather than an unqualified teenager . I repeat , you are the problem . You have had pages of opportunity to discuss the positives and negatives of a real scientist being the face of net zero but instead of that you have posted false claims and straw men ..classic cultist behaviour. Every post I have made in which I have discussed the real science you have ignored, and chosen only to use this thread as a vehicle for attacking a prominent but youthful campaigner who believes in the reality of the same AGW you claim to believe in. And you seem reluctant to tell us how you voted in Zany's poll. How did you vote in it by the way? Your unwillingness to answer merely feeds the suspicion that you might not believe in the reality of AGW at all, but are just saying you do as a way of avoiding criticism. But I am all for discussing the science. It is what I was doing here before you came along to make it all about Thunberg and calling us cultists. If you want to ignore Thunberg who is an irrelevance anyway beyond the fact that some young people listen to her and actually discuss the science, I will be happy to discuss it with you. But unlike Zany and myself and some of our critics, you haven't even begun to discuss the actual science yet. If you do so we might have an intelligent discussion More false claims and straw men . More cultist mentality and deliberate obtuseness. More ‘ if you don’t do what I want then you must be…”. Classic , even the Scientologists couldn’t beat that . I don’t and never did dispute the science . I dispute how the AGW campaign is constructed . |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 9:55:01 GMT
Still making false claims and assumptions I see. You are merely supporting my point. The only point you are successfully making is the silliness and obvious disingenuousness of your own arguments. Are you ever going to tell us how you voted in Zany's poll? Or would an honest answer to that question expose you as a liar? The silliness is your repeated false claim that I am a denier if I want a scientist to head the campaign for net zero . The other rather dishonest silliness is your demand that I vote in the poll or I must be a liar. It’s childish nonsense . Classic cultist mentality. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jun 24, 2023 11:55:16 GMT
It's the usual leftist response to assume that unless you 100% agree then you must believe the exact polar opposite.
And yes, it's typical cultist mentality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 13:05:08 GMT
It's the usual leftist response to assume that unless you 100% agree then you must believe the exact polar opposite. And yes, it's typical cultist mentality. In a nutshell.👍 |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 24, 2023 13:51:24 GMT
It's the usual leftist response to assume that unless you 100% agree then you must believe the exact polar opposite. And yes, it's typical cultist mentality. In a nutshell.👍 ..and talking of nutshells, just over a hundred years ago what was imagineered to be a fossilised coconut shell was subsequently used to fool thousands of world scientists by combining it with bits of bone and teeth to form a skull known as The Piltdown Man; it took 40 years to destroy the myth: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 24, 2023 14:00:27 GMT
..and talking of nutshells, just over a hundred years ago what was imagineered to be a fossilised coconut shell was subsequently used to fool thousands of world scientists by combining it with bits of bone and teeth to form a skull known as The Piltdown Man; it took 40 years to destroy the myth: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_ManThis is proof that they existed youtu.be/E4No1Ol2DLUOoh I didn't know that, I may delete my post in case it shows how scientists can be bamboozled by amateurs. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 24, 2023 14:03:01 GMT
Ooh I didn't know that, I may delete my post in case it shows how scientists can be bamboozled by amateur I posted a joke in the mind zone . Apologies |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 17:05:21 GMT
Every post I have made in which I have discussed the real science you have ignored, and chosen only to use this thread as a vehicle for attacking a prominent but youthful campaigner who believes in the reality of the same AGW you claim to believe in. And you seem reluctant to tell us how you voted in Zany's poll. How did you vote in it by the way? Your unwillingness to answer merely feeds the suspicion that you might not believe in the reality of AGW at all, but are just saying you do as a way of avoiding criticism. But I am all for discussing the science. It is what I was doing here before you came along to make it all about Thunberg and calling us cultists. If you want to ignore Thunberg who is an irrelevance anyway beyond the fact that some young people listen to her and actually discuss the science, I will be happy to discuss it with you. But unlike Zany and myself and some of our critics, you haven't even begun to discuss the actual science yet. If you do so we might have an intelligent discussion More false claims and straw men . More cultist mentality and deliberate obtuseness. More ‘ if you don’t do what I want then you must be…”. Classic , even the Scientologists couldn’t beat that . I don’t and never did dispute the science . I dispute how the AGW campaign is constructed . How did you vote in Zany's poll you lying git? When you decide to talk about the science then we may have an intelligent debate. Until then I am done talking to you cos you are doing nothing but tell those of us who believe in the science and recognise Thunbergs and anyone elses right to campaign about the dangers cultists whilst pretending to believe in it yourself. Nothing sensible is to be expected from you dotty old buggers, clearly. I am not wasting my time on you anymore until or unless you show some honesty and intelligence, instead of telling lies about those of us who listen to the scientists. |
|
