Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2014 18:29:03 GMT -8
Okay both sides of this need to rethink what your saying and how you are saying it. I don't intend to have to moderate a debate but I can call rules for my own thread.
If you wish to attack your opponent in any way don't post. If you wish to justify your side with actual verifiable facts or learned discussion on your own experience with said subject... Post.
|
|
|
Post by Willing Sniper on Jun 2, 2014 18:39:06 GMT -8
Okay both sides of this need to rethink what your saying and how you are saying it. I don't intend to have to moderate a debate but I can call rules for my own thread. If you wish to attack your opponent in any way don't post. If you wish to justify your side with actual verifiable facts or learned discussion on your own experience with said subject... Post. LMAO!! Sorry Shew I can't help it.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2014 18:40:29 GMT -8
I do fathom the problem with asking such, but I am ever hopeful.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 23:29:18 GMT -8
Interesting thing about the poll question... an option was ignored or left out (not necessarily intentionally though)
Question: What happens after an Ice Age? Global Warming. What happened about 12,000 years ago? The end of the most recent Ice Age.
Global Warming is happening... AND it's perfectly natural for the planet.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2014 20:24:46 GMT -8
Very valid point and that's a important point that is used to cloud the issue as well.
Both are true nature itself has cycles of global warming, but humans are also responsible for speeding up the most recent process.
Plus what humans have done has used up resources that would take millions of years to reproduce.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 7:43:54 GMT -8
Tonight's highly anticipated episode of Cosmos has been talked about by both sides of the climate controversy and should be must see Television for all.
Haters, and realists, and nay-sayers, this is guaranteed water-cooler talk tomorrow.
One of the great things I have to say about those debating whether the science is real or not, it has gotten science into the mainstream and given it the voice it deserved long ago. A science show on national network television during prime time and by FOX? Who would have thought?
|
|
|
Post by ♬ pkbucko ♬ on Jun 9, 2014 8:11:03 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by ♬ pkbucko ♬ on Jun 9, 2014 8:12:51 GMT -8
I try to watch this guy's show, but he's painfully boring. Almost every topic that I've seen him hit, I've wanted to watch the show. It's usually about 20 minutes and I'm snoring and drooling.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 8:22:50 GMT -8
Sorry to hear he can't maintain your interest. I find his show delightful and gorgeous, science made simple for the masses, yet engaging for even experts. Making science cool for a new generation.
|
|
|
Post by ♬ pkbucko ♬ on Jun 9, 2014 8:25:33 GMT -8
Sorry to hear he can't maintain your interest. I find his show delightful and gorgeous, science made simple for the masses, yet engaging for even experts. Making science cool for a new generation. The dude could be reading Penthouse and put people to sleep. It's the pace of the show and the pace of his speech that do it. The subject matter is almost always of interest.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 8:32:46 GMT -8
Remember he is talking to the stupid masses. He has to go slow and repeat his point in several ways just to get the idea into their heads.
|
|
|
Post by Joe The Plumber on Jun 9, 2014 8:40:00 GMT -8
The stupid masses? What's stupid is him trying to convince anyone about the liberal climat agenda. He's a black french guy. Why does anyone tune in?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 9:31:00 GMT -8
The average american viewer understands at a fourth grade level... so yeah stupid masses.
Science has no agenda, politics, big money, oil, and coal they have an agenda.
Neil is from Manhattan, NY
and it is spelled climate... sometimes you make my point better than I ever could... :D
|
|
|
Post by ♬ pkbucko ♬ on Jun 9, 2014 9:47:24 GMT -8
Science may not, but scientists do.
|
|
|
Post by Willing Sniper on Jun 9, 2014 10:15:36 GMT -8
Science may not, but scientists do. Explain that agenda and how they plan to benefit from it. Then look at the other side. Always follow the money
|
|
|
Post by Sonny on Jun 9, 2014 10:18:25 GMT -8
I love Cosmos. The pieces come together there for me. I think man is making climate change.
|
|
|
Post by Willing Sniper on Jun 9, 2014 10:19:59 GMT -8
It's a cool program
|
|
|
Post by ♬ pkbucko ♬ on Jun 9, 2014 10:34:31 GMT -8
Science may not, but scientists do. Explain that agenda and how they plan to benefit from it. Then look at the other side. Always follow the money This level of scrutiny is always employed when I'm seeking information. Following the money is exactly right and it does work both ways. Whether it's an agenda pushed by Tom Steyer or someone else. That information should be weighted in decision making.
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Jun 9, 2014 10:58:46 GMT -8
Using the measure of 'Who stands to gain more' the scale swings in the direction of fossil fuel polluters. They have trillions to gain.
I can't even understand what scientist would get out of lying.
|
|
|
Post by Willing Sniper on Jun 9, 2014 11:06:25 GMT -8
Using the measure of 'Who stands to gain more' the scale swings in the direction of fossil fuel polluters. They have trillions to gain. I can't even understand what scientist would get out of lying. Neither do I. The latest thing I hear is they just want to scare, and control the public. To what end?
|
|
Jonah
Chat Challenged
Posts: 53
|
Post by Jonah on Jun 9, 2014 11:11:47 GMT -8
There is no benefit to scientists to tell lies. The majority of scientists agree on this. Only the well paid petrochemical lapdogs say otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Stephie on Jun 9, 2014 11:25:44 GMT -8
I love this show! I've never understood how they're profiting from lying either.
|
|
Jonah
Chat Challenged
Posts: 53
|
Post by Jonah on Jun 9, 2014 11:28:18 GMT -8
I love this show! I've never understood how they're profiting from lying either. That,s what I mean. How are they profiting? It makes no sense.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 13:23:59 GMT -8
Remember he is talking to the stupid masses. He has to go slow and repeat his point in several ways just to get the idea into their heads. You mean Joe right?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 13:24:37 GMT -8
I can give a example where in the long run they might but only in the interest of fixing said problem.
We / They are calling us out on the impending catastrophe. That might actually spark investment in science to help stave of said catastrophe. But if that is real... Which it is.
Then this is altruistic. Benefiting all by applying funds where it is needed to help all of mankind.
What the Oil and power companies need to do is not stagnate that process til they can get ahead of it. Protecting their precious profits. They need to go ahead and drag out those hidden patents they already have and help save us from their mess.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 13:28:45 GMT -8
Remember he is talking to the stupid masses. He has to go slow and repeat his point in several ways just to get the idea into their heads. You mean Joe right? Only if it actually applies. I was referring to the television viewer average.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 15:54:51 GMT -8
I love the concept of the show, and have watched every episode. BUT, I agree with pk. Neil DeGrasse Tyson was not the right person for this show to keep interest. He may be a lot of things, but "engaging" is one thing he's not.
I agree with the "it must be presented in a dumbed down manner" because I agree... the average TV watcher isn't exactly a rocket scientist... but... the way he speaks his monologue, he sounds like he's dumbing it down... and no one likes to be talked down to.
|
|