Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
#4893112
timeware wrote: I like NASA, i support the space program.
Well NASA isn't just the space program, they're involved in many areas.
Do I believe everything scientists tell me? to an extent.
It's not about belief, it's about the research.
They still cant decide whether or not Pluto's a planet or a block of ice.
Well that's about what standards qualify something as a planet. Standards can change, but man made sources contributing to pollution is either a fact or it isn't. It's not the same situation. And climate change is a little more urgent than pluto in any case, heh.
When people use the argument that 99% of climate change scientists agree on something I ask people to look at how scientists were manipulating, and glossing over information they didn't want to include in their findings.
There were some hiccups in the research, there always are. That's not unusual. That doesn't disprove the overall findings.
Do I believe it's man made? No.
Everything we do affects the planet though. Our actions have consequences, nothing in life is free.
#4893113
If all climate change data was a hundred percent accurate we'd all be underwater by now. I'd call manipulating data less then a few hic ups.

The left want to use global warming as a way to promote big government. So when you have them constantly renaming global cooling, global warming, climate change you can call me a bit of a skeptic. That's not adding Al Gore and the leer jet liberals refusing to practice what they preach. I haven't said as a species we don't have room for improvement. I just don't believe we're a hundred percent responsible.
#4893114
You either do the research or you don't. It shouldn't be about spiting the left. And the right certainly has its own bias in favor of big business, so I'm not exactly eager to take their word for it either. ;)

Does NASA represent "the left" to you somehow?

Bottom line, both the left and right should have nothing to do with this issue at all. It's sad that something so petty has been infused into a very real environmental problem.

And a celebrity riding on a jet is minor compared to factories and what they pump into the air on a daily basis. Again, this shouldn't be about spiting people you don't like.

And this isn't about mere room for improvement. It's about radical changes in the planet.
#4893120
I come from Australia and we are feeling the effects of climate change in a big way, its not just some scientific concept but reality. The Great Barrier reef is dying after 18 million years because of the rapid change in the temperature of seawater. That is something anyone can see with their eyes. Summers have become unbearable as they are setting new temperature records one after another. Weather is different, we always used to get storms all the time, almost daily on summer afternoons which helped cool the day down. We dont get them anymore, instead of frequent small storms we get massive ones and cyclones spread further apart that do tons of damage and cause floods, something scientists told us climate change was going to cause. I used to be a climate change sceptic but it changes when the proof of it is in your face every day.
Sav C liked this
#4893128
I don't think Timewar is denying global warming, he just does not believe we are completely responsible for it.
It's perfectly possible this is a natural phenomena that happens every 10.000 years or so, which makes it hard to predict.
Then again, it's also very, very possible the last 100 years of human technology are speeding up the process big time.
Maybe not 100%, but even if it's 50% or 40%, don't you think we should slow that down? Life can adapt, sometimes fast and sometimes slow, but this will affect our way of life if we don't adapt. If not for us, then our kids.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4893134
I don't have an issue with doing something about it.
What I have an issue with are the celebrity politicians who know crap about the subject claiming to be experts on Global warming. Al Gore claiming the debate is over because the facts weren't in his favor at the time. What a lot of people don't realize his grades at Harvard were less then impressive making a D-minus in Earth science. I think it's majorly skeptic that after his loss he became an expert on it over night.

even in an inconvenient truth there were some misleading data.
Yeah I agree we should slow things down but we aren't there yet. Invest in clean fuel technologies and use fossil fuels until it becomes more readily available. I'm just tired of movies having to push whatever agenda Hollywood's ranting about. Is it really big of a deal to ask Great Outdoors to be just a fun movie about two different families?
#4893136
timeware wrote: What I have an issue with are the celebrity politicians who know crap about the subject claiming to be experts on Global warming.
Yes politicians are annoying, but that doesn't change the research. The two are not connected.
Invest in clean fuel technologies
The right and big business have zero reason to do that, as long as excuses are made for climate change.
Is it really big of a deal to ask Great Outdoors to be just a fun movie about two different families?
Yes, it was a fun movie. A fun movie whose theme was economics. That's why the families are different. If that's removed from the story, then it's arguably not worth doing at all. Ghostbusters also had the economics angle, it was a big theme in 80s movies. That's an "agenda." But you don't have a problem with that, do you?

#4893137
Of course politicians and research are connected, how can they not be?

Another example of that is Leonardo De Caprio. He became an expert almost instantly after hanging out with Al Gore a few times. I'm not saying that all global warming research is cooked but the talking points the liberals like to use do need to be questioned. It is based on research or their points of view on it.
#4893138
timeware wrote:Of course politicians and research are connected, how can they not be?

Another example of that is Leonardo De Caprio. He became an expert almost instantly after hanging out with Al Gore a few times. I'm not saying that all global warming research is cooked but the talking points the liberals like to use do need to be questioned. It is based on research or their points of view on it.
But I don't think global warming is man made because of Gore or DiCaprio. They are just figure heads. Not worth a fuss over either way. I mentioned NASA before, that's what I go by.
#4893190
timeware wrote:but the talking points the liberals like to use
"liberally-minded"
"left-leaning"
"global warming supporters"

So many options that are so much better, so much more three-dimensional than "the liberals". I hate how lazy political discussion has gotten everywhere (and I'm just as guilty of this) that we're at the point of demeaning each other with the labels of "the liberals" and "the conservatives", and reinforcing the belief that someone can't be more than just one or the other, and that there's no possible ground for compromise for fear of becoming the opposite side of the political spectrum.

So I guess what I'm trying to ask is, please be a bit more creative than "the liberals/the conservatives". :)
Alphagaia, JurorNo.2, Commander_Jim and 2 others liked this
#4893232
Kingpin wrote:
timeware wrote:but the talking points the liberals like to use
"liberally-minded"
"left-leaning"
"global warming supporters"

So many options that are so much better, so much more three-dimensional than "the liberals". I hate how lazy political discussion has gotten everywhere (and I'm just as guilty of this) that we're at the point of demeaning each other with the labels of "the liberals" and "the conservatives", and reinforcing the belief that someone can't be more than just one or the other, and that there's no possible ground for compromise for fear of becoming the opposite side of the political spectrum.

So I guess what I'm trying to ask is, please be a bit more creative than "the liberals/the conservatives". :)
Easier said then done. Global warming is a complex issue. You have groups using Climate change to enrich themselves, you have groups using climate change for political issues.

Theres also the now religious, cult like followers (not saying anyone here is) that follow an inconvenient truth like it were a bible. So, how do you discuss this without labeling groups that want to exploit global warming for their own benefit?
#4893233
timeware wrote:
You have groups using Climate change to enrich themselves, you have groups using climate change for political issues.
Just because you don't like the messenger in this case doesn't mean the message is false. Doctors profit from vaccinations. That doesn't mean you can't trust vaccinations.
#4893237
timeware wrote:Are you saying your okay with people using misleading data to promote man made global warming? Scientist's were found manipulating data that's not B.S.
I would like a legitemate link that claims this to get the complete context, but it does not automatically mean all scientists are manipulating data though. And a lot of scientists are warning us. Are you saying they are all wrong?
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4893238
timeware wrote:Are you saying your okay with people using misleading data to promote man made global warming? Scientist's were found manipulating data that's not B.S.
We went over this. Scientific research is a long, complicated process, as it should be. You will always have some individuals who screw it up. That doesn't mean the overall findings by the majority of the science community are incorrect. Again, do you think NASA scientists are intentionally misleading people? For what reason? And besides that, why does the idea that factories cause climate change bother you so much?
Last edited by JurorNo.2 on May 4th, 2017, 8:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
#4893242
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_ ... ontroversy

Not getting into conspiracy. this actually happened. Scientists are manipulating data concerning man made global warming.

When you provide misleading data it doesn't get people on board to your cause. I know factories cause pollution, i'm not denying they don't and saying we shouldn't do something about it. I'm only pointing out that a lot of information concerning global warming is less then factual due to many people having a political big government agenda.

politicians and political scientists did have a goal of scaring people into accepting programs like cap and trade.
#4893243
timeware wrote: I know factories cause pollution, i'm not denying they don't and saying we shouldn't do something about it.
Then what is the problem?
I'm only pointing out that a lot of information concerning global warming is less then factual
Not as much as you seem to think. Not enough to warrant denying the overwhelming evidence.

And at this point, we're just repeating the same points anyway so, moving on. ;)
Alphagaia liked this
#4893245
Yeah, reading that link it even says the whole controversy is out of context, though it would help for scientist to be more open, but general consensus about is that global warming is still a result of human activity:
Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.[15] However, the reports called on the scientists to avoid any such allegations in the future by taking steps to regain public confidence in their work, for example by opening up access to their supporting data, processing methods and software, and by promptly honouring freedom of information requests.[16] The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged throughout the investigations.[17]
Reminds me of another leak that constantly got taken out of context...
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4893248
I also feel the need to add that while Wikipedia is a good general basis for information (especially on topics that don't have controversial stances, and folks who've been poloarized to opposing viewpoints), but it is not always a good source to cite as your primary source of information on a controversial topic, Universities have in the past not accepted Wikipedia as a primary source because of how easily it can be edited.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4893255
SpaceBallz wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:I heard Milo liked it...
He also liked the original Ghostbusters
I couldn't care less. He used the original Ghostbusters to hurt people. I will never consider him a fan. Being a fan ought to mean something.
Sav C, Kingpin, Alphagaia liked this
#4893256
Kingpin wrote:Universities have in the past not accepted Wikipedia as a primary source because of how easily it can be edited.
Yeah, even I'm allowed to edit it. :shock: Do you know the band Mountain? I once changed the track length for their song Taunta (Sammy's Tune), since I though it was listed wrong. Turns out that it was right, and that it was the CD transfer that got it wrong. The Wikipedia version was going from the vinyl pressing, which was correct. Turns out the song isn't even called Taunta (Sammy's Tune) even though that's what the CD lists it as. It's actually Nantucket Sleighride.

Nantucket Sleighride, that reminds me of a dirty limerick...
JurorNo.2, Alphagaia liked this
#4893276
JurorNo.2 wrote:
SpaceBallz wrote:
He also liked the original Ghostbusters
I couldn't care less. He used the original Ghostbusters to hurt people. I will never consider him a fan. Being a fan ought to mean something.
Well what we're you getting at when you said he was a fan of the documentary? You brought his name up. If he likes something that automatically makes it bad? I bet he enjoys cheeseburgers too.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4893281
SpaceBallz wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:
I couldn't care less. He used the original Ghostbusters to hurt people. I will never consider him a fan. Being a fan ought to mean something.
Well what we're you getting at when you said he was a fan of the documentary? You brought his name up. If he likes something that automatically makes it bad? I bet he enjoys cheeseburgers too.
Ok, ok, sorry for the snark. Just saying, he'd like anything that's critical of feminism. And hey, do I think men often get screwed in custody battles? Absolutely. Is male suicide a problem? Obviously. But there are many feminists who do indeed care about these issues. Milo and his ilk fear monger about feminism to a ridiculous degree.
#4893282
JurorNo.2 wrote:
SpaceBallz wrote:
Well what we're you getting at when you said he was a fan of the documentary? You brought his name up. If he likes something that automatically makes it bad? I bet he enjoys cheeseburgers too.
Ok, ok, sorry for the snark. Just saying, he'd like anything that's critical of feminism. And hey, do I think men often get screwed in custody battles? Absolutely. Is male suicide a problem? Obviously. But there are many feminists who do indeed care about these issues. Milo and his ilk fear monger about feminism to a ridiculous degree.
Well a feminist made the documentary and it's a pretty balanced film, it ends with encouraging discussions with both the MRA and feminists. I dunno I think everybody should watch it regardless of any political views.
pferreira1983 liked this
  • 1
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16

got a link? It appears that some time today[…]

I love that. I actually think a better version of […]

Afterlife Ecto Goggles Build

Thank you for posting this information. This is a[…]

I'd really like to see the new t-shirt unlocks t[…]