trysts wrote:
She does inspire people to write their opinions on the matter:)
I like these threads also, it's fun, gives you something to comment on
Climate Science = Lysenkoism
Sort:
Nov 11, 2015
0
#23
trysts wrote:
She does inspire people to write their opinions on the matter:)
Indeed. 
Nov 11, 2015
0
#24
Wolfbird wrote:
trysts wrote:
She does inspire people to write their opinions on the matter:)
Indeed.
And a Jamie thread always brings out your opinions on matters, wolfbird, so it's an extra plus!
Nov 11, 2015
0
#25
Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
trysts wrote:
She does inspire people to write their opinions on the matter:)
I like these threads also, it's fun, gives you something to comment on
True, since I just can't get into 'who was the greatest chessplayer of all time' threads anymore
Nov 11, 2015
0
#29
Could someone make a coherent argument that supports climate change denier's oft touted claim that 'big money' is somehow behind climate change theory? I only see big money fighting climate change regulations...
klimski wrote:
Could someone make a coherent argument that supports climate change denier's oft touted claim that 'big money' is somehow behind climate change theory? I only see big money fighting climate change regulations...
The money in oil is nothing against the $ of treehuggers.
Anthony Watts is a known shill. It's sad that people take anything he says seriously. This has to be one of the more insane statements he's ever made.
Nov 11, 2015
0
#32
CensoredReality wrote:
Zzzzzzz drop it. No one reading this has had their mind changed.
From a perspective of the scientifc method, your conclusion lacks merit.
Nov 11, 2015
0
#33
Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
JamieDelarosa wrote:
Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
This must be one of the dumbest things existing on the internet. He is comparing Lysenkoisme til AGW even though there are absolutely no parallels.
It was illegal to criticize Lysenko. Whereas it is perfectly legal to criticize AGW, he's doing it himself lol.
Alternativ theories are taught in school, contrary to what he says. Probably he doesnt know how to google.
AGW isnt a "western" thing, as I told you already Japan is independently of the west researching AGW. But I cal tel you again isince you forgot: Japan is independently researching AGW. Japan is not in the west. Therefore AGW = non-western.
The data he is himself referring on the flattening of the temperature rise in the last 5 years COMES from AGW-people. Which does not prevent him from stupidly denying that AGW releases any data lol.
The guy is working for a think tank, he is paid big $$ to spout his nonsense. Incredible that american media is giving space to sucn a bunch of lies.
The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank founded in 1984 and based in Chicago. The Institute conducts work on issues including education reform, government spending, taxation, healthcare, education, tobacco policy, global warming, hydraulic fracturing, information technology, and free-market environmentalism.
In the 1990s, the Heartland Institute worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question or deny the health risks ofsecondhand smoke and to lobby against smoking bans.[2] More recently, the Heartland Institute is the primary American supporter of climate change denial.[3][4][5][6] It rejects the scientific consensus that global warming poses a significant danger to the planet[7] and that human activity is driving it,[8] and says that policies to fight it would be damaging to the economy.[9]
Of course there are parallels. You didn't read the full op-ed by Ferrara, did you?
And true to form, like a good little fellow-traveller, your response is an ad hominem attack.
Ferrara predicted such a response. In his article, he wrote:
Still another tip off should have been the practice of the alarmist new Lysenkoists to respond to dissenting science with ad hominem attacks. That apparently reflects poor public schooling that never taught that an ad hominem attack is a logical fallacy, as Aristotle taught more than 2,000 years ago. My how western science has fallen.
You have been hoist with your own petard!
Yeah I read it. Most of it was a rehash of the Lysenko affair which i know already. He provided zero arguments why ADW has anything to do with Lysenko affair.
And I am not responding with ad hominem attacks, I didnt write he was wrong becauese of who he his, he is wrong just because he is wrong.
I can tell you again
Japan not in west
Japan do AGW research
So AGW research no western property
And no under west control
Your diatribe about the Heartland Institute is an example of the "guilt-by-association" logical fallacy, which is a type of ad hominem attack.
Did you never take a course in logic & reason, or heve you never studied debate?
Nov 11, 2015
0
#34
VirtualKnightJoakim wrote:
See other thread, forum also by JamieDelarosa:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/nobel-laureate-destroys-global-warming-hoax
Thank you. This topic is focused on the parallels between Lysenkoism and Global Warming Alarmism, on both aspects of the scientific approaches, as well as political applications.
Whip_Kitten wrote:
Wolfbird wrote:
Jamie has no other life but to create threads like this...
When she feels criticised, her defense mechanisms kick in, and she does the exact opposite of what we ask her to do.
On my end, I don't mind a thread about global warming at all. Her threads and ideas are thought provoking. I do mind countless threads about it when one suffices.
I think most people agree that Lysenkoism was bad science supported by an authoritarian regime. And Alarmism, in the United States, is not significantly different.
Nov 11, 2015
0
#35
Wolfbird wrote:
Politics. Politicians. Lobbyists. Money. Greed. Evil.
I'd rather be on the side of cleaning up the huge mess humans have created.
The six attributes you listed are part of the "Mess".
For your listening pleasure, Paul McCartney and Wings, 1973, "The Mess":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om5xcVhR1c8
Nov 11, 2015
0
#36
Here is a lecture given by Dr. Richard Linzen, retired Alfred Sloan Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T (1983-2013)
This lecture is titled, "Global Warming Alarmism: Science in the Public Square"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RLPdEMjphM
Linden discusses the consequences of bad science:
"The public inability to judge science inevitably leads to the ascendency of mediocrities and incompetents (Trofim Lysenko/Lysenkoism, Harry Laughlin/Eugenics, Michael Mann/Climate Alarmism, Phil Jones/Climate Alarmism ...). Unfortunately, this often induces better scientists to join the pack, in order to preserve their status."
"Advocates grossly exaggerate their results."
"Profound 'dumbing down' of the discussion (including the abdication of logic), which interacts with the ascendency of incompetents."
Nov 11, 2015
0
#37
Linden - "The issue of global warming is clearly a mess. It has been costly to society, it has the potential to be vastly more costly, and it has been damaging to science."
Nov 12, 2015
0
#38
The Faux 97% Consensus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NinRn5faU4
Radical Environmentalism
Media Bias
Indoctrination of Children
Contrived and Corrupt Green Investment Markets
Corruption of International Organizations (IPCC, UN, etc)
Faux Concensus of Scientific Organizations
Corruption of Governmental "Scientific" Organizations (NASA, NOAA, CSIRO, CRU, etc)
Systematic Exclusion of Differing Points of View
Nov 12, 2015
0
#39
The corruption of governmental agencies, indoctrination, and the exclusion of differing views is what Lysenkoism, and today, AGW alarmism, is all about.
JamieDelarosa wrote:
VirtualKnightJoakim wrote:
See other thread, forum also by JamieDelarosa:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/nobel-laureate-destroys-global-warming-hoax
Thank you. This topic is focused on the parallels between Lysenkoism and Global Warming Alarmism, on both aspects of the scientific approaches, as well as political applications.
Whip_Kitten wrote:
Wolfbird wrote:
Jamie has no other life but to create threads like this...
When she feels criticised, her defense mechanisms kick in, and she does the exact opposite of what we ask her to do.
On my end, I don't mind a thread about global warming at all. Her threads and ideas are thought provoking. I do mind countless threads about it when one suffices.
I think most people agree that Lysenkoism was bad science supported by an authoritarian regime. And Alarmism, in the United States, is not significantly different.
Yes is completel different. Let me point out the most important:
Lysenkoism - nobody allowed to criticize Lysenko
AGW - everybopdy allowed to criticize AGW
See the difference?
Another one here
Lysenkoism - One single country "protects" a scientific theory, which doesn exist anywhere else because it's crap and only survives with govt. support
AGW - Is popular in each and every single counrtry that has a scientific culture, including Japan and S. Corea etc etc.
"ignorance" is a key word in this thread :)