Indirect Effects of the Sun on Earth's Climate[W:376]

[Surface Detail]

In Google, go to the appropriate German language blog page. In the upper right hand corner of your screen, Google will ask if you want the passage translated to English. Click yes. The translation will appear exactly as in the post we have been discussing.

No, you are lying. The Google translation comes out as:

"Not correct. In fact, the sun has actually gotten stronger in the last 50 years, taking into account the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (white graph), which also includes cosmic rays and solar magnetic fields."

which is pretty good, but not as natural sounding as Gosselin's translation:

"False. The sun has actually become stronger in the last 50 years when one considers the total solar irradiance (TSI – white curve in the diagram), which also includes cosmic rays and the solar magnetic field."

As for figurative meanings of einbeziehen:

einbeziehen - English translation in English - Langenscheidt ...


https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/einbeziehen

to bring sth into one’s sphereof influence, to achieve controlof sth



etwas in seinen Machtbereicheinbeziehen




Translation for 'einbeziehen' using the free German-English dictionary by LANGENSCHEIDT -– with examples, synonyms and pronunciation.

None of which mean inhibit, as you claimed :roll: They are all terms similar in meaning to include.

Why on Earth are you trying to make an issue of this? You are obviously not a German speaker and are simply wrong in claiming that the translation is incorrect.

 

[Threegoofs]

No, you are lying. The Google translation comes out as:

"Not correct. In fact, the sun has actually gotten stronger in the last 50 years, taking into account the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (white graph), which also includes cosmic rays and solar magnetic fields."

which is pretty good, but not as natural sounding as Gosselin's translation:

"False. The sun has actually become stronger in the last 50 years when one considers the total solar irradiance (TSI – white curve in the diagram), which also includes cosmic rays and the solar magnetic field."



None of which mean inhibit, as you claimed :roll: They are all terms similar in meaning to include.

Why on Earth are you trying to make an issue of this? You are obviously not a German speaker and are simply wrong in claiming that the translation is incorrect.

See: Knight, Black. Re: python.

 

[Jack Hays]

No, you are lying. The Google translation comes out as:

"Not correct. In fact, the sun has actually gotten stronger in the last 50 years, taking into account the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (white graph), which also includes cosmic rays and solar magnetic fields."

which is pretty good, but not as natural sounding as Gosselin's translation:

"False. The sun has actually become stronger in the last 50 years when one considers the total solar irradiance (TSI – white curve in the diagram), which also includes cosmic rays and the solar magnetic field."



None of which mean inhibit, as you claimed :roll: They are all terms similar in meaning to include.

Why on Earth are you trying to make an issue of this? You are obviously not a German speaker and are simply wrong in claiming that the translation is incorrect.

Actually, you are in your posts demonstrating the Dunning Kruger effect quite nicely.
The Google translation as I described is what came up when I checked.
The use of "inhibit" was my poetic license and what I would do if I were translating. As pointed out subsequently, "control" or "bring under control" would be the dictionary answer, which seems to appeal to you.
I can tell from this exchange that my German is quite a bit better than yours. (Not as good as my French, but better than my Swahili.)
You have embarrassed yourself.

 

[Jack Hays]

See: Knight, Black. Re: python.

 

[Jack Hays]

[FONT=&quot]“You’re good, Kid, but as long as I’m around you’re second best,” says Lancey, pointing a finger in Eric’s direction. “You might as well learn to live with it.”[/FONT]

 

[Quaestio]

As you have been told before, that is the Black Prince at Crécy, not Monty Python's Black Knight.

 

[Jack Hays]

[h=2]Sun As Main Driver: Japanese Scientist Cites 7 Major Examples How Real Climatic Data Contradict AGW Claims[/h]By P Gosselin on 13. January 2019

 

[Surface Detail]

Actually, you are in your posts demonstrating the Dunning Kruger effect quite nicely.
The Google translation as I described is what came up when I checked.
The use of "inhibit" was my poetic license and what I would do if I were translating. As pointed out subsequently, "control" or "bring under control" would be the dictionary answer, which seems to appeal to you.
I can tell from this exchange that my German is quite a bit better than yours. (Not as good as my French, but better than my Swahili.)
You have embarrassed yourself.

I'm honestly baffled about your reason for lying about this, Jack. What's the point of lying about something that can be easily checked by anyone and shown to be wrong? Poetic license? :lamo It's supposed to be a scientific explanation, not a literary work!

This is the original German, from the blog page roll you cited:

"Falsch. Die Sonne ist in den letzten 50 Jahren in Wahrheit stärker geworden, wenn man die Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (weiße Kurve im Diagramm) berücksichtigt, die auch die kosmische Strahlung bzw. das Sonnenmagnetfeld mit einbezieht."

Mojib Latif: Drei Aussagen, drei Mal voll daneben | Die kalte Sonne

This is Gosselin's translation:

"False. The sun has actually become stronger in the last 50 years when one considers the total solar irradiance (TSI – white curve in the diagram), which also includes cosmic rays and the solar magnetic field."

Leading German Climate Scientist Mojib Latif Caught Up In A Web Of Contradictions

And this is Google's translation:

"Not correct. In fact, the sun has actually gotten stronger in the last 50 years, taking into account the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (white graph), which also includes cosmic rays and solar magnetic fields."

https://translate.google.com/transl...ib-latif-drei-aussagen-drei-mal-voll-daneben/

As you, I and anyone else can see, Gosselin's translation is not identical the Google translation. There is simply no point in your lying about this. Gosselin's translation is clearly his own, as he claims, not Google's.

Have you actually lost the ability to distinguish between reality and your own imagination?

 

[Surface Detail]

You are also lying, or confused, about the dictionary definition, Jack.

"to bring sth into one’s sphere of influence / to achieve control of sth" are translations of the phrase "etwas in seinen Machtbereich einbeziehen" (very literally: to include something in one's power domain), not translations of the word "einbeziehen" itself, which simply means to include / involve.

 

[Quaestio]

You are also lying, or confused, about the dictionary definition, Jack.

"to bring sth into one’s sphere of influence / to achieve control of sth" are translations of the phrase "etwas in seinen Machtbereich einbeziehen" (very literally: to include something in one's power domain), not translations of the word "einbeziehen" itself, which simply means to include / involve.

Bwahahah!

The best garbage is the garbage that takes itself out.

 

[Surface Detail]

Bwahahah!

The best garbage is the garbage that takes itself out.

Frankly, I am starting to wonder about Jack's sanity. His lying is usually carefully calculated to leave him a get-out through some small grey zone of ambiguity, but this is just bizarre. What is the point of lying about things that can be seen to be lies by anyone with an internet connection? He has completely destroyed any credibility that he might have had.

 

[Jack Hays]

I'm honestly baffled about your reason for lying about this, Jack. What's the point of lying about something that can be easily checked by anyone and shown to be wrong? Poetic license? :lamo It's supposed to be a scientific explanation, not a literary work!

This is the original German, from the blog page roll you cited:

"Falsch. Die Sonne ist in den letzten 50 Jahren in Wahrheit stärker geworden, wenn man die Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (weiße Kurve im Diagramm) berücksichtigt, die auch die kosmische Strahlung bzw. das Sonnenmagnetfeld mit einbezieht."

Mojib Latif: Drei Aussagen, drei Mal voll daneben | Die kalte Sonne

This is Gosselin's translation:

"False. The sun has actually become stronger in the last 50 years when one considers the total solar irradiance (TSI – white curve in the diagram), which also includes cosmic rays and the solar magnetic field."

Leading German Climate Scientist Mojib Latif Caught Up In A Web Of Contradictions

And this is Google's translation:

"Not correct. In fact, the sun has actually gotten stronger in the last 50 years, taking into account the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) (white graph), which also includes cosmic rays and solar magnetic fields."

https://translate.google.com/transl...ib-latif-drei-aussagen-drei-mal-voll-daneben/

As you, I and anyone else can see, Gosselin's translation is not identical the Google translation. There is simply no point in your lying about this. Gosselin's translation is clearly his own, as he claims, not Google's.

Have you actually lost the ability to distinguish between reality and your own imagination?

You're grasping at a minor point. As I said, the translation was identical (or I thought it was) when I checked.
Regardless of whose translation it was, it was wrong.
German, or any foreign language, is not just English with other words. Each language sorts reality and expresses thoughts differently, so translation requires transferring the sense, not just the words, from one to another. Poetic license is always a factor, regardless of the text's origin.
That is why "inhibit" seemed to me better than the dictionary-approved "achieve control over" and still does, but if you prefer the latter that's fine too. What is clearly incorrect is "include."

 

[Surface Detail]

You're grasping at a minor point. As I said, the translation was identical (or I thought it was) when I checked.
Regardless of whose translation it was, it was wrong.
German, or any foreign language, is not just English with other words. Each language sorts reality and expresses thoughts differently, so translation requires transferring the sense, not just the words, from one to another. Poetic license is always a factor, regardless of the text's origin.
That is why "inhibit" seemed to me better than the dictionary-approved "achieve control over" and still does, but if you prefer the latter that's fine too. What is clearly incorrect is "include."

Now you're just trolling. Words of every language have specific meanings (ask LoP), even if those meanings don't map directly to the words of another language. You can't simply make up a meaning and call it poetic license! That is what we call lying.

 

[Jack Hays]

Now you're just trolling. Words of every language have specific meanings (ask LoP), even if those meanings don't map directly to the words of another language. You can't simply make up a meaning and call it poetic license! That is what we call lying.

Actually, it's what we call translation.

 

[Surface Detail]

Actually, it's what we call translation.

You're deluded. Translation is the process of changing a piece of text from one language to another while conveying the original meaning as closely as possible, rather than, as you appear to think, conveying whatever meaning you want it to have. You are a fraud, Jack, and that is obvious to anyone reading this thread.

 

[Lord of Planar]

You're grasping at a minor point. As I said, the translation was identical (or I thought it was) when I checked.
Regardless of whose translation it was, it was wrong.
German, or any foreign language, is not just English with other words. Each language sorts reality and expresses thoughts differently, so translation requires transferring the sense, not just the words, from one to another. Poetic license is always a factor, regardless of the text's origin.
That is why "inhibit" seemed to me better than the dictionary-approved "achieve control over" and still does, but if you prefer the latter that's fine too. What is clearly incorrect is "include."

It's just another example of his ignorant arrogance. He things he knows better than google translate.

 

[Surface Detail]

It's just another example of his ignorant arrogance. He things he knows better than google translate.

Are you completely illiterate? :roll: It's Jack who's disputing the output of Google translate, my opinion, the opinion of P Gosselin (the translator of the article) and the opinion of every German-English dictionary. That, I think, is what you would have to call the height of ignorant arrogance!

 

[Jack Hays]

You're deluded. Translation is the process of changing a piece of text from one language to another while conveying the original meaning as closely as possible, rather than, as you appear to think, conveying whatever meaning you want it to have. You are a fraud, Jack, and that is obvious to anyone reading this thread.

I'm happy to await whatever judgment others may make. It's unfortunate you are so certain and so wrong at the same time.

 

[Threegoofs]

Heres a post.

You're deluded. Translation is the process of changing a piece of text from one language to another while conveying the original meaning as closely as possible, rather than, as you appear to think, conveying whatever meaning you want it to have. You are a fraud, Jack, and that is obvious to anyone reading this thread.

Followed quickly by this one.

It's just another example of his ignorant arrogance. He things he knows better than google translate.

I LOLed.

apparenly, LoP doesnt know German, so no one else does. Or he 'things' he knows.

 

[Quaestio]

It's just another example of his ignorant arrogance. He things he knows better than google translate.

Jack was wrong and is lying LoP. Defending him just makes you look silly. If you had followed this exchange it should be obvious even to you.

Words have meaning.

 

[Quaestio]

I'm happy to await whatever judgment others may make. It's unfortunate you are so certain and so wrong at the same time.

You were wrong and you're continuing to lie about it. Pretty simple.

 

[Jack Hays]

You were wrong and you're continuing to lie about it. Pretty simple.

Nope. I have this one exactly right.

 

[Quaestio]

Nope. I have this one exactly right.

You're really going to continue to lie about this. Why does that not surprise me.

 

[Jack Hays]

You're really going to continue to lie about this. Why does that not surprise me.

You simply don't know enough to be effective in this discussion.

 

[Quaestio]

You simply don't know enough to be effective in this discussion.

Yes I do. You were wrong. You got caught out. You lied about it. You continue to lie about it. Simple.