Author Topic: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"  (Read 6852 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #25 on: April 25, 2008, 06:04:02 PM »
Science has specific parameters that define what it is.  I don't want people to "bow at the knee" or whatever.  I just want them to know what science is and isn't and what it can do and what it cannot.  It is a simple question of definition.

Actually, it is more than that.  Ponder this quote for a moment:

Quote
Who you are speaks so loudly I can't hear what you're saying.  -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Imagine for a moment that you are a car salesman and I am a person looking to buy a car.  It doesn't matter if the car you're selling is the most reliable, fastest, economical, etc car available - most times your presentation of those facts will make all the difference.  If you're trying to sell a car from a position of arrogance, you're going to go home hungry most nights. 

I followed that thread about Ben Stein's movie somewhat closely as it was interesting to me.  It appeared that you were saying some very compelling things but everytime I read one of your posts that quote from Emerson above came to me. 

If none of what I'm saying matters to you, then just ignore my post and carry on. 

It matters, but it doesn't make sense.  I am not "selling" anything.  I am providing education.  I am an advocate for information over superstition. I do not, nor shall I ever apologize for being a zealot against willful ignorance.



where has anyone discussed superstition to date?

Offline Chris_

  • Little Lebowski Urban Achiever
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46845
  • Reputation: +2028/-266
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #26 on: April 25, 2008, 06:09:53 PM »



where has anyone discussed superstition to date?

Clumsy word -- but I am having difficulty findng the exact word.  Belief and Faith don't quite work.  Maybe Supernatural would be better.  The idea that there is a place within the structure of science for non-natural causes.

If you want to worship an orange pile of garbage with a reckless disregard for everything, get on down to Arbys & try our loaded curly fries.

Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #27 on: April 25, 2008, 06:11:01 PM »



where has anyone discussed superstition to date?

Clumsy word -- but I am having difficulty findng the exact word.  Belief and Faith don't quite work.  Maybe Supernatural would be better.  The idea that there is a place within the structure of science for non-natural causes.



hmm.. ok.. i dont find faith and supernatural to be interchangeable.. but like i said before, we dont have to agree on everything.  :cheersmate:

Offline Chris_

  • Little Lebowski Urban Achiever
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46845
  • Reputation: +2028/-266
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #28 on: April 25, 2008, 06:16:17 PM »



where has anyone discussed superstition to date?

Clumsy word -- but I am having difficulty findng the exact word.  Belief and Faith don't quite work.  Maybe Supernatural would be better.  The idea that there is a place within the structure of science for non-natural causes.



hmm.. ok.. i dont find faith and supernatural to be interchangeable.. but like i said before, we dont have to agree on everything.  :cheersmate:

Well, that is always a mine field.  The words "superstition" or "supernatural" make people think that their faith or religion are being pooh-poohed (and I am a person of great faith).  And that usually starts a whole branch of discussion away from the issue at hand.  Perhaps "extra-natural" would be a better fit.
If you want to worship an orange pile of garbage with a reckless disregard for everything, get on down to Arbys & try our loaded curly fries.

Offline Rebel

  • Stick a fork in us. We're done.
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16808
  • Reputation: +1259/-215
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #29 on: April 25, 2008, 07:13:11 PM »
Pop Quiz:

1. What do the quotes in the WPC article prove?

2. What do all but one of the quotes have in common?

What does it prove? That a bunch of egghead ****in' scientists can be wrong and HAVE been wrong. It also proves that idiots that believe this bullshit being pimped by Al Gore and the other jackasses are exactly that, idiots who'll buy into the first lame-brained idea that comes their way so long as it trashes success.
NAMBLA is a left-wing organization.

Quote
There's a reason why patriotism is considered a conservative value. Watch a Tea Party rally and you'll see people proudly raising the American flag and showing pride in U.S. heroes such as Thomas Jefferson. Watch an OWS rally and you'll see people burning the American flag while showing pride in communist heroes such as Che Guevera. --Bob, from some news site

Offline CactusCarlos

  • Pray, eat your vitamins, and one day you too could be a
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4113
  • Reputation: +296/-100
  • If I agree with you, then we'll both be wrong.
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #30 on: April 25, 2008, 08:40:58 PM »
It matters, but it doesn't make sense.  I am not "selling" anything.  I am providing education.  I am an advocate for information over superstition. I do not, nor shall I ever apologize for being a zealot against willful ignorance.

Sure you are - you are trying to convince others of your point.  This is no different than selling and we all do ith.  You believe that the facts that you present should stand on their own without question.  The problem is that the world does not work this way.  People will, by nature, tune you out when they feel that you are talking down to them. 

No one is asking you to apologize for being a zealot.  Personally, I admire your passion and your knowledge.  It's your delivery that is a turn off. 
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened."
  -- Norman Thomas, six-time Socialist Party presidential candidate and one of the founders of the ACLU


Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #31 on: April 25, 2008, 09:27:45 PM »
Pop Quiz:

1. What do the quotes in the WPC article prove?

2. What do all but one of the quotes have in common?

What does it prove? That a bunch of egghead ******' scientists can be wrong and HAVE been wrong. It also proves that idiots that believe this bullshit being pimped by Al Gore and the other jackasses are exactly that, idiots who'll buy into the first lame-brained idea that comes their way so long as it trashes success.

it would be interesting to hunt down all those people in the OP and ask them why none of their hysterical headlines didnt work out.

i'm sure its Bush's fault in some way :-)

Offline The Night Owl

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1597
  • Reputation: +22/-5102
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #32 on: April 25, 2008, 09:41:34 PM »
What does it prove? That a bunch of egghead ******' scientists can be wrong and HAVE been wrong. It also proves that idiots that believe this bullshit being pimped by Al Gore and the other jackasses are exactly that, idiots who'll buy into the first lame-brained idea that comes their way so long as it trashes success.

A bunch of egghead scientists? Any credentials or degrees held by the people quoted are not listed, so we have no way of knowing their standing, if any, in the scientific community. In some cases, the person being quoted isn't named. Most of the quotes are partial quotes and all of the quotes seem to be taken out of context.

"By 1985... air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the earth by one half." - Life magazine, January 1970

Life magazine? Life magazine is not a scientific publication. The quote is useless.

“...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind," biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.

Okay. George Wald... a real scientist. Why not provide the full text of what Wald said? It can't have been that long.

By 1995, "...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct." - Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.

This is funny. The quote is not only incomplete but secondhand as well. Why not quote Dr. Ripley completely and directly?

Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor... "the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born." - Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.

Newsweek magazine? Newsweek magazine is not a scientific publication. The quote is useless.

The world will be "...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age," Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

Another partial quote. What Kenneth Watt actually said...

"The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age." - Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

As anyone can see, Mr. Watt did not say that the cooling trend would continue. What he said was that if the cooling trend continues, the world will enter an ice age.

"We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation." - Biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.

The quote is complete but what is the quote about? Disease? Climate change? Famine? Pollution? Nuclear testing? We don't know. Anyway, I'll accept the quote as a legitimate example of scientific doomsaying since the quote is the first complete one.

"Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction." - The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.

Who is the author of the editorial and what are that person's scientific credentials? We don't know. The quote is useless.

"Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make." - Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

The quote doesn't indicate when population will outstrip the food supply, so I'm hesitant to categorize it as doomsaying proven wrong.

"It is already too late to avoid mass starvation." - Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

Denis Hayes is not a scientist. Enough said.

"By the year 2000... the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine." - Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

Peter Gunter is a professor of Philosophy.

"Far out man." - Posted by DonWard at April 22, 2008 08:52 AM

Far out indeed. Idiot.

So, what do we have here? We have, if we include one partial quote and one secondhand quote, 4 examples of 4 scientists engaging in what seems to be doomsaying. A pretty weak compilation.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2008, 10:12:30 PM by The Night Owl »
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas

Offline Lord Undies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11388
  • Reputation: +639/-250
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #33 on: April 25, 2008, 09:47:29 PM »

Offline Rebel

  • Stick a fork in us. We're done.
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16808
  • Reputation: +1259/-215
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #34 on: April 26, 2008, 12:10:21 AM »
TNO is dumb enough an individual that he'd tell you 40,005 ways to toast bread; 20,000 wrong, and 10,005 ways right, and 10,000 ways that won't toast it at all.

TNO, Life doesn't write a damn thing. "Life" is a magazine. An inanimate object. It does, however, have writers who, I would "assume" have some sort of credentials in the field. Kinda like the morons today.

What are you, about 22? Sad to be such a ****ing dumbass at such a young ****ing age.  :whatever:
NAMBLA is a left-wing organization.

Quote
There's a reason why patriotism is considered a conservative value. Watch a Tea Party rally and you'll see people proudly raising the American flag and showing pride in U.S. heroes such as Thomas Jefferson. Watch an OWS rally and you'll see people burning the American flag while showing pride in communist heroes such as Che Guevera. --Bob, from some news site

Offline The Night Owl

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1597
  • Reputation: +22/-5102
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #35 on: April 26, 2008, 07:19:38 AM »
Quote
TNO, Life doesn't write a damn thing. "Life" is a magazine. An inanimate object. It does, however, have writers...

My point exactly. The opinion of some staff writer from Life magazine is irrelevant to science and yet some here are trying to use it and other irrelevant quotes to portray the scientific community as a bunch of idiots.

Quote
... who, I would "assume" have some sort of credentials in the field. Kinda like the morons today.

An unwise assumption.

Quote
What are you, about 22? Sad to be such a ******* dumbass at such a young ******* age.

Why is everyone obsessed with my age?
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Reputation: +2234/-269
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #36 on: April 26, 2008, 07:32:27 AM »
It's an interesting tact. Unless the climate chicanery comes from Scientific American (which I stopped reading because of all the activism ads featuring Alan Alda) TNO will discount it as if Life magazine deliberately misquoted the scientists being interviewed.

But here's my question: if second-hand sources = bunk what does that make TNO's posting this alarmist BS?

Follow-up question:

I wonder if Nobel prizes are irrelevant to science?
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."

Offline The Night Owl

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1597
  • Reputation: +22/-5102
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #37 on: April 26, 2008, 07:49:27 AM »
Quote
It's an interesting tact. Unless the climate chicanery comes from Scientific American (which I stopped reading because of all the activism ads featuring Alan Alda) TNO will discount it as if Life magazine deliberately misquoted the scientists being interviewed.

The quote from Life does not appear to be a quote from anyone let alone a scientist. It seems to be a statement which might be based on what a scientist told a writer from Life, but we don't really know what the statement is based on or if the statement is an accurate representation. And, keep in mind that the quote is a partial one. A while back, I demonstrated how partial quotes can be used to misrepresent someone's position...

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=2865.msg41584#msg41584

Partial quotes are the tool of a dishonest writer who intends to manipulate readers.

But here's my question: if second-hand sources = bunk what does that make TNO's posting this alarmist BS?

I can assure you that I don't want people forming their opinions about global warming on anything I have to write about it. In my posts on global warming, I often include links to scientific material I use as the basis for my arguments precisely because I don't want anyone to get the impression that I'm trying to pass myself off as an authority on the subject of climate.

Quote
Follow-up question:

I wonder if Nobel prizes are irrelevant to science?


Basically... yes.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 08:02:53 AM by The Night Owl »
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Reputation: +2234/-269
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #38 on: April 26, 2008, 09:09:31 AM »
And yet the Nobel society gives its prize to Al Gore for his schlockumentary...which even you retreat from.

So much for peer-review. Perhaps a better term would be hand-wringing activist circle jerk dressed up as scientificalism.

Oh, to be sure many (most?) prizes are well deserved but it seems a little leaven, leaveneth the whole loaf.

Loafer:


i can haz invisbul catastrophe?
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."

Offline The Night Owl

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1597
  • Reputation: +22/-5102
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #39 on: April 26, 2008, 09:30:18 AM »
And yet the Nobel society gives its prize to Al Gore for his schlockumentary...which even you retreat from.

I would have to have taken a position in defense of An Inconvenient Truth for me to retreat from it. Nice try.
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23049
  • Reputation: +2234/-269
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #40 on: April 26, 2008, 09:33:41 AM »
And yet the Nobel society gives its prize to Al Gore for his schlockumentary...which even you retreat from.

I would have to have taken a position in defense of An Inconvenient Truth for me to retreat from it. Nice try.
Fine.

Then I reterm it to: "ran away from in stark terror"
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."

Offline CactusCarlos

  • Pray, eat your vitamins, and one day you too could be a
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4113
  • Reputation: +296/-100
  • If I agree with you, then we'll both be wrong.
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #41 on: April 26, 2008, 11:10:05 AM »
Why is everyone obsessed with my age?

Why are you evasive about your age?  :-)
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened."
  -- Norman Thomas, six-time Socialist Party presidential candidate and one of the founders of the ACLU


Offline Lord Undies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11388
  • Reputation: +639/-250
Re: "By 1995.. 85% of all species of living animals will be extinct"
« Reply #42 on: April 26, 2008, 11:19:31 AM »
Why is everyone obsessed with my age?

Why are you evasive about your age?  :-)

Lift up his chins and count the rings.