Page 15 of 52 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 519

Thread: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

  1. #141
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Post #51.


    It was the result of a survey sent out to more than 3000 earth scientists: 97% of active climatologists agree that human activity is causing global warming : Deltoid.


    Appeal to Validity of Consensus. Appeal to Authority.


    Post #98:


    . . . it is ultimately a consensus of the scientific community that determines whether a purported discovery is valid or a crock of sh*t.


    You claim "I never claimed that a consensus makes something RIGHT" and here you wrote the exactly what you claim you had not written.
    You're still doing it, this time by selectively quoting what I wrote. The next sentence was, "Copernicus discovered that the the earth wasn't the center of the universe, but we might not know it if Galileo hadn't championed his discovery and convinced the scientific community that Copernicus was right." In other words, the consensus doesn't make something right (Copernicus discovered the right answer), but the consensus does communicate to the world at large what it considers to be the right answer.

    And you never seem to actually address the real point, which is that it's irrational for someone with little scientific training and a poor understanding of climate change to be utterly convinced that he or she has a better understanding of the problem than thousands of scientists who have dedicated their lives to understanding the problem.

    Would you care to address that, finally?

  2. #142
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,964

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    If so you're pretty much the only self-described conservative I've heard from who thinks so. I'm not saying you're wrong - the more I look at it the more I think you might not be - just that if you're right, it's strange that we don't hear about it more often, and even stranger how much the media/Democrats seem to love the guy while he gets like 1% support among his actual party.
    The "Democrats" seem to love him because:

    1. He won't even sniff around hinting Obama's a Muslim or a Terrorist or a Kenyan. Sadly, you can't say that for some big named conservatives.

    2. He's not opposed to Same Sex unions.
    2a. That instantly makes them not as worried about someone being a "religious fundamentalist" since its hard to be that AND be okay with gays gaining some kind of marriage

    3. His biggest break with conservatism is he's generally pro-environmentalism which is big for some liberals

    4. He's a more traditional conservative with regards to the military, similar but not nearly as far gone as Ron Paul. Its sad actually that a mentality akin to what Bush had in 2000 and was viewed as staunchly conservative is now considered "moderate" by both sides of the aisle due to the politicizing of the War on Terror the past decade

    5. He's got a track record of actually succeeding at fiscal policy and good business practices. A lot of your moderate democrats can be appealed to by that...just like the Reagan Democrats of old...because they don't necessarily disagree with the idea, they just don't believe most conservatives who push it since they've not delivered results in ages.

    6. They don't know much about him besides the standard lines that are trotted out there by the media on BOTH sides and that he was ambassador for Obama. So I think most of its assumed. I think if he got the nomination we'd suddenly see some "realizing" he either is or "has become" a "right wing extremist"

    I agree, the portrayal of him is the second coming of John McCain, which just boggles my mind from a reality stand point but sadly makes sense from the stand point of the Republican establishment and the liberal media who both don't really want the guy i think.

  3. #143
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    the authority appealed to is actually an authority in the field under discussion, it's not a logical fallacy. It's only a logical fallacy when one appeals to a an expert in one field for his opinion on an unrelated matter.
    To be fair, it can still be a fallacy even if the authority actually is an expert in the field in question. The fallacy occurs when the appeal is done in order to assert that a conclusion must be true. This is because any appeal to legitimate authority is inductive in nature, and therefore can only be stated as "likely true".

    A logically valid appeal to authority:

    There is a consensus among climate experts about Global warming being real.
    A consensus of experts is presumed to be true.
    Therefore Global warming being real is presumed to be true.

    A fallacious appeal to authority would be:

    Persona A is a climate expert
    Person A believes that global warming is definitely a fraud
    Therefore global warming is definitely a fraud.

    Even though person A may really be an expert, the argument is still fallacious.

  4. #144
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    If you spent any time in academia, you would see that the real number of true "experts" on something like this is rather small. Dedicating one's life to the study of wind patterns or modeling theory hardly makes you an expert on everything that goes into a theory of global warming.

    I know many highly regarded, published scientists who don't understand some of the basic fundamentals of how science works being discussed in this thread. The have vast, specialized knowledge in their chosen area of study, but never took the time or an interest in scientific fundamentals. They simply adopted the paradigm of their major advisor, began doing research, and never looked back.
    Yes, that is pretty much my point. For the most part we have no choice but to accept the scientific consensus because no one has the time to independently study and verify all the precursor discoveries that lead up to the present state of knowledge. Climate science is a huge field of study that requires the input of physicists, statisticians, chemists, biologists, geologists, oceanographers, and a whole host of other disciplines. In fact what makes AGW theory so robust is that it's cross-checked by so many different disciplines. And in turn, this is what makes it so absurd for someone with no advanced scientific training to conclude that he or she knows better. From my experience, most of the people who are absolutely convinced that the theory is a HOAX cannot even begin to describe the theory.
    Last edited by AdamT; 08-19-11 at 12:08 PM.

  5. #145
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    The "Democrats" seem to love him because:

    1. He even sniff around hinting Obama's a Muslim or a Terrorist or a Kenyan. Sadly, you can't say that for some big named conservatives.
    2. He's not opposed to Same Sex unions.
    2a. That instantly makes them not as worried about someone being a "religious fundamentalist" since its hard to be that AND be okay with gays gaining some kind of marriage
    3. His biggest break with conservatism is he's generally pro-environmentalism which is big for some liberals
    4. He's a more traditional conservative with regards to the military, similar but not nearly as far gone as Ron Paul. Its sad actually that a mentality akin to what Bush had in 2000 and was viewed as staunchly conservative is now considered "moderate" by both sides of the aisle due to the politicizing of the War on Terror the past decade
    5. He's got a track record of actually succeeding at fiscal policy and good business practices. A lot of your moderate democrats can be appealed to by that...just like the Reagan Democrats of old...because they don't necessarily disagree with the idea, they just don't believe most conservatives who push it since they've not delivered results in ages.
    6. They don't know much about him besides the standard lines that are trotted out there by the media on BOTH sides and that he was ambassador for Obama. So I think most of its assumed. I think if he got the nomination we'd suddenly see some "realizing" he either is or "has become" a "right wing extremist"

    I agree, the portrayal of him is the second coming of John McCain, which just boggles my mind from a reality stand point but sadly makes sense from the stand point of the Republican establishment and the liberal media who both don't really want the guy i think.
    When I started reading up about him my first thought was "This guy reminds me of Zyph for some reason" and my next thought was "I would vote for a guy like that."

  6. #146
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,964

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    there is a lot of lip service paid towards fiscal responsibility form each party, but certain people like Huntsman appear to spend more time actually doing it than talking about it.
    Exactly. There's no one in the race that gives me more confidence that they'd get the country back on track than him, because he's got a track record of walking the walk and doing it in a successful manner. I just get disheartened because most conservatives are like Dav, and Dav I'm not meaning this as an insult. What I mean is that most hear the general standard fare about Huntsman, buy in, and it goes no farther. And that's going to destroy any chance he has. Which is extremely unfortunate.

    I'm not saying he's 100% perfect conservative guy. He's got issues that would hit the base. I've acknowledged them all over the forum. At one point he was fine with an individual mandate, he was fine with Cap and Trade on a state level, his spending in total money increased, he's okay with civil unions, he's not big on a interventionist type of foreign policy, and he's been okay with potential "paths to citizenship" for illegals such as the Dream Act.

    However, sadly, all you tend to hear is those things without ever having them stated with a fair shake. You hear about the individual mandate support...you don't hear the same can be said for Newt and many Republicans at a time and that in the end, with his support and his backing, market driven consumer focused health care reform was passed. You hear about him signing in a state level Cap and Trade, you don't hear about him admitting it was failed and that he wouldn't support it on a national level as we and it are now. His spending increased, but as a percent of GDP it went down, actually shrinking the general size of government compared to the rest of the economy. A non-interventionist type of foreign policy was heralded as staunchly conservative by Bush supports in 2000 and yet somehow is moderate or liberal now. And you don't hear that first and foremost, before he'd talk about or look into ANYTHING else, he'd secure the border first. The very stance that conservatives were screaming at Bush and McCain to take throughout the latter 2000's.

    He's got issues, but even on those issues if one gives them a fair and thorough look they're generally not as bad as they're first perceived. They still may be bad for some. Mr. V can't stand him and you know what, he's explained it in such a way to show he fully grasps the facts but just doesn't on principle, and I can respect that. But unfortunately I think MOST conservatives aren't going to be coming at it from that point...they're just going to hear the first few negatives, never be given more information or look into more, and just believe that to be the truth of him.

    There's not an individual in this race that I think would be better in a general election vs Obama or better as President.

  7. #147
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,964

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    When I started reading up about him my first thought was "This guy reminds me of Zyph for some reason" and my next thought was "I would vote for a guy like that."
    No wonder he gets so much Conservative hate

    And in all seriousness, sorry if I came off a bit harsh at any point Dav. Early morning and my brain hasn't been fully in gear I think. I commend you for looking into him more and trying to come up with your own judgement even if that judgement is "Don't like him". At least you're giving him an honest inspection which is more than many can say sadly.

    I jumped on the bandwagon pretty quick with him once I researched him a bit. He's very similar to me in that he's somewhat of a social moderate, he's fiscally and governmentaly conservative but seems to be rather pragmatic and realistic in his approach to governance rather than ideological, he's a more traditional conservative with regards to the military in which you want a strong defense but your aim should be using it only when needed, and he's someone that actually wants to run on ideas and his record rather than attacks and rhetoric.

    So sadly, yeah...probably doomed in this political age. heh.

  8. #148
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    In case one...You make $4000 a month, your bills and living expenses cost you $3200, you're paying $300 on minimum payments of credit cards, and you're spending $1000 on misc purchases and entertainment. Well, that means every month you're putting $500 on your credit card because you're spending too much, which raises slowly that minimum payment you have to pay as it compounds your debt.

    In case two...You've managed to make $500 more a month, meaning $400. Your bills and living expenses still cost you $3200, but you're debt is far more manageable and from your past, so you only pay $25 a month on it. You however started adding a gym membership to your monthly expenditures, making you spend $1125 an misc purchases and entertainment. Now, rather than a $500 debt, you're running a $150 surprlus. Meaning each month you've got money you're putting into the bank and/or paying down your debt. And you're doing that with increased spending.
    Excellent analogy.

  9. #149
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Ummmm...Tell me how a tooth suddenly starts to sprout hairs and becomes a survival advantage as it evolves into baleen..ie baleen whale? At some point, it becomes ineffective at catching larger fish and is not yet effective at straining out plankton. Yet somehow the tooth continues to change and adapt. Not just in one family line but in enough to supply sufficient genetic diversity for a species to arise. And do it with other animals living in the same water eating the same food and not changing???
    The use of the word "suddenly" indicates that you don't have a very firm growth of evolutionary theory. While some evolutionary changes can happen relatively quickly in response to rapid changes in the environment, others occur over millions or tens of millions of years. So in this case you might have had a group of whales that was born with above-average ridges inside their mouths that trapped slightly more food than a non-ridged mouth. That may have given them a modest survival advantage over less-ridged-mouth whales in time of thin food supply, which increased the likelihood that the next generation would be born with ridged mouths. The bigger the ridges, the bigger the advantage, so the change was reinforced across succeeding generations. The process plays out across several million years and it *suddenly* appears to be some kind of miracle, when in fact it's just the accumulation of extremely modest changes over a very long time period.

  10. #150
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,953

    Re: Huntsman on evolution, warming: 'Call me crazy'

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    The use of the word "suddenly" indicates that you don't have a very firm growth of evolutionary theory. While some evolutionary changes can happen relatively quickly in response to rapid changes in the environment, others occur over millions or tens of millions of years. So in this case you might have had a group of whales that was born with above-average ridges inside their mouths that trapped slightly more food than a non-ridged mouth. That may have given them a modest survival advantage over less-ridged-mouth whales in time of thin food supply, which increased the likelihood that the next generation would be born with ridged mouths. The bigger the ridges, the bigger the advantage, so the change was reinforced across succeeding generations. The process plays out across several million years and it *suddenly* appears to be some kind of miracle, when in fact it's just the accumulation of extremely modest changes over a very long time period.
    what you described is natural selection. Natural selection results is variation within a species due to survival of the fittest. Evolution results in speciation where one species becomes another different species.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

Page 15 of 52 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •