SD70Dude ATLANTIC CENTRAL Charlie, do you believe in God? Do you believe life has some higher meaning or purpose beyond the few minutes we spend alive on this planet? If not, what difference does it make what happens in 50 or 75 years? Or 150 years? Or for that matter 25 years? I don't, but I take no particular objection to those who do. As long as they don't try to impose their morals and beliefs upon the rest of society. I believe that we are nothing more than meatbags composed of the various elements found on the periodic table, just like all the other animals on this planet. I also believe that we should go about our lives treating other people as we wish to be treated, and that we should leave the planet in such a state that our descendents can continue living safe, comfortable lives. It is not necessary to believe in a Religion to live what I would consider to be a moral life.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Charlie, do you believe in God? Do you believe life has some higher meaning or purpose beyond the few minutes we spend alive on this planet? If not, what difference does it make what happens in 50 or 75 years? Or 150 years? Or for that matter 25 years?
Charlie, do you believe in God? Do you believe life has some higher meaning or purpose beyond the few minutes we spend alive on this planet?
If not, what difference does it make what happens in 50 or 75 years? Or 150 years? Or for that matter 25 years?
I don't, but I take no particular objection to those who do. As long as they don't try to impose their morals and beliefs upon the rest of society.
I believe that we are nothing more than meatbags composed of the various elements found on the periodic table, just like all the other animals on this planet.
I also believe that we should go about our lives treating other people as we wish to be treated, and that we should leave the planet in such a state that our descendents can continue living safe, comfortable lives.
It is not necessary to believe in a Religion to live what I would consider to be a moral life.
+2
(I am not an atheist, though. I am an agnostic, and a recovering Catholic.)
I don't think that belief in God has anything to do with wanting (or not) to leave a healthy planet to our grandkids and their grandkids and ...
+1
The verse with Jesus speaking in Matthew 6:5 is appropriate here as is Numbers 35:33.
There really is not a very high correlation between people who say they are religious, have faith, etc. and moral, principled, ethical behavior along the lines of the Golden Rule, variations of which are found in several religions, Confucianism and some Greek philosophies.
SD70Dude ATLANTIC CENTRAL SD70Dude School student society on the other hand has some rather questionable morals, which from talking to older folks seem to not have evolved much over the past 50 years. I'm not sure what this refers to? College student behavior? Not something I have first hand knowledge of. All my College course work was done after I had a job, wife, children and life....... I did not spend my youth partying......... Sheldon As I went directly into the workforce after high school, I have never attended a college, university, or post-secondary institution of any kind. The student body of a large school forms its own society, much like a large workplace or even a small town. The members of that society change with each passing school year, but the society itself endures. The 'morals' of that society are what you would expect from young people whose brains have not yet fully developed. Being different is bad, risk taking is good, involving the established authorities in your problems is a sign of weakness, and (of course) homophobia and racism of various types are still present. It certainly wasn't the teachers who taught those 'morals'..... For my own part, before and after graduating high school I participated in a good number of risky activities which, looking back, were rather stupid and could have led to some of us being injured or killed (it all seemed fun at the time).
ATLANTIC CENTRAL SD70Dude School student society on the other hand has some rather questionable morals, which from talking to older folks seem to not have evolved much over the past 50 years. I'm not sure what this refers to? College student behavior? Not something I have first hand knowledge of. All my College course work was done after I had a job, wife, children and life....... I did not spend my youth partying......... Sheldon
SD70Dude School student society on the other hand has some rather questionable morals, which from talking to older folks seem to not have evolved much over the past 50 years.
School student society on the other hand has some rather questionable morals, which from talking to older folks seem to not have evolved much over the past 50 years.
I'm not sure what this refers to? College student behavior? Not something I have first hand knowledge of. All my College course work was done after I had a job, wife, children and life....... I did not spend my youth partying.........
Sheldon
As I went directly into the workforce after high school, I have never attended a college, university, or post-secondary institution of any kind.
The student body of a large school forms its own society, much like a large workplace or even a small town. The members of that society change with each passing school year, but the society itself endures. The 'morals' of that society are what you would expect from young people whose brains have not yet fully developed. Being different is bad, risk taking is good, involving the established authorities in your problems is a sign of weakness, and (of course) homophobia and racism of various types are still present.
It certainly wasn't the teachers who taught those 'morals'.....
For my own part, before and after graduating high school I participated in a good number of risky activities which, looking back, were rather stupid and could have led to some of us being injured or killed (it all seemed fun at the time).
Well, I too never attended college in the traditional sense, went right to work the Monday after graduation, and attended a large public Senior High School with a student population that exceeded 3000.
All teenagers test the boundaries, but apparently my experiences were much different from yours as even my worst choices were not particularly risky. Few if any of my peers in school were engaged in dangerous or serious bad behavior.
A year and a half after high school I was married and settled down, and happy to be such.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
charlie hebdo ATLANTIC CENTRAL charlie hebdo These aren't experimental designs. Your cautionary terminology is misappropriated. If hundreds of researchers are reaching similar conclusions over a period of at least 25 years of ongoing, serious work, it strikes me as disingenuous to keep ridiculing their conclusions. It's long past time to take action. Charlie, do you believe in God? Do you believe life has some higher meaning or purpose beyond the few minutes we spend alive on this planet? If not, what difference does it make what happens in 50 or 75 years? Or 150 years? Or for that matter 25 years? I likely will not be here, I'm 62 and in good health, but have already out lived most males in my family. If I make it 20 or 25 more I will be really happy. And if you do believe, than don't you think there might be a plan we don't understand, like all the other things we don't understand? I do believe we should be reasonable stewards of the planet, you and I talked about my views on that several pages ago. But I will admit rather bluntly, I'm not in for the kind of life style changes that are being suggested. And I'm not in for throwing away major aspects of our culture and history (like the old houses I restore) to "save the planet". What will we have saved? I would rather drive my truck into a bridge abutment then live in the world some are proposing. I have worked hard in my lifetime for what I have, and they will have to take it by force to tell me to live in a smaller house, drive a slower, smaller car, be colder, or be hotter, etc, etc. And trust me, when they come for me I will be ready to shoot back. All we can do is stop being wasteful, as I suggested earlier, but many of those who claim we need to do something are the biggest wasters of all. Building cheap houses, remodeling them on whim, buying cheap goods that fill landfills, replacing perfectly good stuff to stay in style. I could go on. Yet they say I should give up my work truck, my gas boiler heat, and big house where I build my 1600 sq ft model train layout? BS Car on the road today with the biggest carbon footprint including its manufacture - Toyota Prius. I really get tired of tripping over those stupid things on the highway....... Sheldon God helps those who help themselves.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL charlie hebdo These aren't experimental designs. Your cautionary terminology is misappropriated. If hundreds of researchers are reaching similar conclusions over a period of at least 25 years of ongoing, serious work, it strikes me as disingenuous to keep ridiculing their conclusions. It's long past time to take action. Charlie, do you believe in God? Do you believe life has some higher meaning or purpose beyond the few minutes we spend alive on this planet? If not, what difference does it make what happens in 50 or 75 years? Or 150 years? Or for that matter 25 years? I likely will not be here, I'm 62 and in good health, but have already out lived most males in my family. If I make it 20 or 25 more I will be really happy. And if you do believe, than don't you think there might be a plan we don't understand, like all the other things we don't understand? I do believe we should be reasonable stewards of the planet, you and I talked about my views on that several pages ago. But I will admit rather bluntly, I'm not in for the kind of life style changes that are being suggested. And I'm not in for throwing away major aspects of our culture and history (like the old houses I restore) to "save the planet". What will we have saved? I would rather drive my truck into a bridge abutment then live in the world some are proposing. I have worked hard in my lifetime for what I have, and they will have to take it by force to tell me to live in a smaller house, drive a slower, smaller car, be colder, or be hotter, etc, etc. And trust me, when they come for me I will be ready to shoot back. All we can do is stop being wasteful, as I suggested earlier, but many of those who claim we need to do something are the biggest wasters of all. Building cheap houses, remodeling them on whim, buying cheap goods that fill landfills, replacing perfectly good stuff to stay in style. I could go on. Yet they say I should give up my work truck, my gas boiler heat, and big house where I build my 1600 sq ft model train layout? BS Car on the road today with the biggest carbon footprint including its manufacture - Toyota Prius. I really get tired of tripping over those stupid things on the highway....... Sheldon
charlie hebdo These aren't experimental designs. Your cautionary terminology is misappropriated. If hundreds of researchers are reaching similar conclusions over a period of at least 25 years of ongoing, serious work, it strikes me as disingenuous to keep ridiculing their conclusions. It's long past time to take action.
These aren't experimental designs. Your cautionary terminology is misappropriated. If hundreds of researchers are reaching similar conclusions over a period of at least 25 years of ongoing, serious work, it strikes me as disingenuous to keep ridiculing their conclusions. It's long past time to take action.
I likely will not be here, I'm 62 and in good health, but have already out lived most males in my family. If I make it 20 or 25 more I will be really happy.
And if you do believe, than don't you think there might be a plan we don't understand, like all the other things we don't understand?
I do believe we should be reasonable stewards of the planet, you and I talked about my views on that several pages ago.
But I will admit rather bluntly, I'm not in for the kind of life style changes that are being suggested. And I'm not in for throwing away major aspects of our culture and history (like the old houses I restore) to "save the planet". What will we have saved?
I would rather drive my truck into a bridge abutment then live in the world some are proposing.
I have worked hard in my lifetime for what I have, and they will have to take it by force to tell me to live in a smaller house, drive a slower, smaller car, be colder, or be hotter, etc, etc. And trust me, when they come for me I will be ready to shoot back.
All we can do is stop being wasteful, as I suggested earlier, but many of those who claim we need to do something are the biggest wasters of all. Building cheap houses, remodeling them on whim, buying cheap goods that fill landfills, replacing perfectly good stuff to stay in style. I could go on.
Yet they say I should give up my work truck, my gas boiler heat, and big house where I build my 1600 sq ft model train layout? BS
Car on the road today with the biggest carbon footprint including its manufacture - Toyota Prius. I really get tired of tripping over those stupid things on the highway.......
God helps those who help themselves.
And we have already discussed a long list of things that could easily be done, and things I have done to do my part.
But I'm not in favor of holding people economically hostage, or holding them at gun point to compel them to think and act like me.
As I do not wish to be treated that way.
I work hard to use resources wisely, to be individually responsible. I'm happy that my truck any puts out 1% of the harmful stuff my 1968 car did.
I saved a 120 year old house and made it use only 1/3 of the energy it did in 1995 when I bought it.
I would like all the spoiled millennials to stop ripping out perfectly good kitchens and bathrooms in old houses because they are not trendy enough for their dinner parties.......but it's not really my business to tell them what to do.
I would like to shut down the mobile lawn service industry and go back to the "gardener" model where home owners own there own high quality lawn care equipment and the gardener comes to your house and uses your on site equipment.
Rather than massive fleets of 8 mpg FORD F350's lugging around trailers full of zero turns, sucking up millions of gallons of fuel, clogging up traffic, and causing traffic problems when they park in the street to unload.
But that's not my right either.
Want some more ideas? I have a long list, but I'm not the dictator.........
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I have worked hard in my lifetime for what I have, and they will have to take it by force to tell me to live in a smaller house, drive a slower, smaller car, be colder, or be hotter, etc, etc. And trust me, when they come for me I will be ready to shoot back.
Do you basically just live your life angry? Is that you default mode?
rrnut282 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Schools? You mean those socialist re-education camps I sent my six children to, just to have every moral value I taught them questioned and undermined? Teach them proven facts, math, reading and science skills, teach them hands on skills like the trades, and critical thinking/problem solving, leave the moral education to the parents now that the society has decided not to adhere to a common set of standards. When I was a child, my parents had a list of rights and wrongs. When I went to the neighbors house to play with Johnny, his mother had the same list. When I went to school the teacher and the principle had that same list, when I traveled into the town square, the shop keeper had the same list. When I reached a certain age, and a certain level of maturity, I began to see that there was a small grey area between right and wrong. I made my own informed choices on those issues. Not so with the children I raised. Long before they had the maturity or skills to navigate the grey areas, teachers and others told them I was wrong and that the grey area was very large.......... The society is not a better place overall as a result. Sheldon They no longer teach critical thinking otherwise, the children might think for themselves instead of drinking the AGW kool-aid. A question I have yet to get an answer: I live in the Midwest. Ten-thousand years ago where we are standing, it was almost a mile deep in snow and ice. What caveman drove a SUV or built a coal-fired power plant caused it to melt? Is it entirely possible this is a natural process? The US has reduced its per-capita carbon output as a consequence of a changing economy and more efficient processes in manufacturing. All without jumping off the economic cliff of Paris or Kyoto. When it becomes affordable and convenient, we will get off fossil fuels, not before.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Schools? You mean those socialist re-education camps I sent my six children to, just to have every moral value I taught them questioned and undermined? Teach them proven facts, math, reading and science skills, teach them hands on skills like the trades, and critical thinking/problem solving, leave the moral education to the parents now that the society has decided not to adhere to a common set of standards. When I was a child, my parents had a list of rights and wrongs. When I went to the neighbors house to play with Johnny, his mother had the same list. When I went to school the teacher and the principle had that same list, when I traveled into the town square, the shop keeper had the same list. When I reached a certain age, and a certain level of maturity, I began to see that there was a small grey area between right and wrong. I made my own informed choices on those issues. Not so with the children I raised. Long before they had the maturity or skills to navigate the grey areas, teachers and others told them I was wrong and that the grey area was very large.......... The society is not a better place overall as a result. Sheldon
Schools? You mean those socialist re-education camps I sent my six children to, just to have every moral value I taught them questioned and undermined?
Teach them proven facts, math, reading and science skills, teach them hands on skills like the trades, and critical thinking/problem solving, leave the moral education to the parents now that the society has decided not to adhere to a common set of standards.
When I was a child, my parents had a list of rights and wrongs. When I went to the neighbors house to play with Johnny, his mother had the same list. When I went to school the teacher and the principle had that same list, when I traveled into the town square, the shop keeper had the same list.
When I reached a certain age, and a certain level of maturity, I began to see that there was a small grey area between right and wrong. I made my own informed choices on those issues.
Not so with the children I raised.
Long before they had the maturity or skills to navigate the grey areas, teachers and others told them I was wrong and that the grey area was very large..........
The society is not a better place overall as a result.
They no longer teach critical thinking otherwise, the children might think for themselves instead of drinking the AGW kool-aid.
A question I have yet to get an answer: I live in the Midwest. Ten-thousand years ago where we are standing, it was almost a mile deep in snow and ice. What caveman drove a SUV or built a coal-fired power plant caused it to melt? Is it entirely possible this is a natural process?
The US has reduced its per-capita carbon output as a consequence of a changing economy and more efficient processes in manufacturing. All without jumping off the economic cliff of Paris or Kyoto. When it becomes affordable and convenient, we will get off fossil fuels, not before.
Well said
Extreme caution needs to be exercized when "consensus" and "science" are used together as the consensus can be blown away with a reproducible experiment where the sources of potential error are well understood and documented. The problem with climate is that natural variations are not well understood, and to use "largely" requires that natural variations are understood better than they currently are understood.
ruderunner charlie hebdo +1 "Primary" "consensus" "largely" "dominant" are the terms from a large number of scientific bodies and agencies in terms of man's role in global warming. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus Care to quantify those terms?
charlie hebdo +1 "Primary" "consensus" "largely" "dominant" are the terms from a large number of scientific bodies and agencies in terms of man's role in global warming. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
"Primary" "consensus" "largely" "dominant" are the terms from a large number of scientific bodies and agencies in terms of man's role in global warming.
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Care to quantify those terms?
Perhaps you could read the linked NASA summary? You just might learn something.
Modeling the Cleveland and Pittsburgh during the PennCentral era starting on the Cleveland lakefront and ending in Mingo junction
Lithonia Operator BaltACD ATLANTIC CENTRAL ruderunner Here's a question for the "truthers" how much as a percentage of global warming caused by humans? How much is natural? How much is undetermined? I asked that basic question three or four pages ago with no response........ Seems pretty arrogant to think we can fix something that might be 90% mother nature? Again, maybe our efforts would be better spent adapting rather than fixing? Sheldon And it is also very arrogant of us to think that 7+ BILLION human beings and all the use of the resources humankind is extracting from the planet is having no effect upon it. +1
BaltACD ATLANTIC CENTRAL ruderunner Here's a question for the "truthers" how much as a percentage of global warming caused by humans? How much is natural? How much is undetermined? I asked that basic question three or four pages ago with no response........ Seems pretty arrogant to think we can fix something that might be 90% mother nature? Again, maybe our efforts would be better spent adapting rather than fixing? Sheldon And it is also very arrogant of us to think that 7+ BILLION human beings and all the use of the resources humankind is extracting from the planet is having no effect upon it.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL ruderunner Here's a question for the "truthers" how much as a percentage of global warming caused by humans? How much is natural? How much is undetermined? I asked that basic question three or four pages ago with no response........ Seems pretty arrogant to think we can fix something that might be 90% mother nature? Again, maybe our efforts would be better spent adapting rather than fixing? Sheldon
ruderunner Here's a question for the "truthers" how much as a percentage of global warming caused by humans? How much is natural? How much is undetermined?
Here's a question for the "truthers" how much as a percentage of global warming caused by humans? How much is natural? How much is undetermined?
I asked that basic question three or four pages ago with no response........
Seems pretty arrogant to think we can fix something that might be 90% mother nature?
Again, maybe our efforts would be better spent adapting rather than fixing?
And it is also very arrogant of us to think that 7+ BILLION human beings and all the use of the resources humankind is extracting from the planet is having no effect upon it.
Thanks for emphasizing my point. I don't claim that humans have no effect. Neither did Sheldon or for that matter, I've never heard any denier claim that the climate isn't changing.
I asked you how much is under our control?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Again, maybe our efforts would be better spent adapting rather than fixing?
Food for thought:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/aug/31/citi-report-slowing-global-warming-would-save-tens-of-trillions-of-dollars
Personally, I accept the inconvenient truth (it's a shame Al Gore gave that phrase a bad name) that the current global warming we are experiencing is largely human-caused. But I don't think that the world as a whole is going to take action to slow or stop it, for a variety of reasons. That may not even be possible, what with the positive feedback loop of methane emissions from thawing permafrost.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_methane_emissions
Ironically, my little corner of the world (western Canada) actually stands to benefit from a warmer climate (longer growing season, easier winters, etc).
As one of the forum members who was in school more recently I was going to write something longer on the morals that I experienced, but it's Christmas Eve and I've wasted enough time already. Suffice it to say that, looking back, I have no real problem with what I was taught. All I'll say is that some subjects did not go far enough, like the study of the history of Canada's relationship with Indigenous peoples and the Residential Schools.
Gramp"Well, all I know is what I read in the papers." Will Rogers
"I got no friends 'cause they read the papers..."
Alice Cooper
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
exactly why i asked. The ones screaming and protesting and calling others "deniers" are accusing them of not wanting to acknowledge science.
But if someone asks, they have no answers.
Still, i think it ironic that what is one of the most fuel efficient forms of transportation is being demonized as anti environment.
tree68 ruderunner Here's a question for the "truthers" how much as a percentage of global warming caused by humans? How much is natural? How much is undetermined? And that, sir, is the $64,000 question that no one can answer...
And that, sir, is the $64,000 question that no one can answer...
Right-e-o. There's too much noise in the data presently to make a determination. That's why I'm for taking prudent actions that are economic, and the heck with all this short-term analysis and speculative nonsense.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
"Well, all I know is what I read in the papers." Will Rogers
Exxon. They have known the dangers of AGW since the early 90s. Now the are recognizing the danger and supporting an inadequate $40/ton carbon tax, but better than nothing, better late than never.
https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2019/12/03/exxon-carbon-tax-imperial-oil-canada/
tree68As I recall, there was nothing academic about the dime research, other than proving that research provides the answers you're looking for.
This is reminiscent of the course of the 'bumblebees can't possibly fly' chestnut, where the story commonly heard turned out to bear comparatively little resemblance to the reality involved. You may remember that the Greek sophistic tradition reveled even in the days of Socrates into being able to 'prove' all sorts of wacky stuff 'logically' through carefully-crafted argument that is similar to the standards often used for scientific evaluation, and this is one of the reasons why rhetoric is (or at least ought to be) kept as rigorously as possible out of legitimate scientific practice and presentation.
The central point was that, using accepted cancer research practices and parameters, something as innocuous as a dime caused cancer.
The point being, perhaps, that it would. At least under the circumstances used. Remember the old Playboy 'scientific' proof that marijuana caused brain damage? You need to see the assumptions, the methodology, the details of the procedure before you can assess the validity, let alone the correctness, of the conclusions reached by the researchers.
This being even before you have to recognize that there are several different things considered as 'cancer' that are very different in origin and development. Retinoblastoma, for example, is not really a cancer at all in the typically-understood sense; it is normal embryonic development of the optic nerve that was not properly switched off by appropriate (and even as yet ill-recognized) growth sequencing before birth.
I am highly reminded of something I happily participated in that qualifies as dubious research, although it didn't 'look' like it, a "combined ocular melanoma study" in the late Eighties. This was an intensive retrospective study supposedly using a large number of cases in the records at New York Hospital and Mass General, going back in some cases over 40 years, to determine the most effective modalities to treat ocular melanoma (either of primary origin or metastatic). I carefully set up arrangements to have grad students use laptops for data entry right in the central records facilities, to gather large amounts of technically unrelated data in case there were unanticipated correlations, etc. etc. etc. And then one day, my father (about 5 beers in, at the Recovery Room bar on 70th) started grumbling about how the COMS was junk science. Having spent so much time and trouble on it, I asked him (with some asperity, as I was beginning to perceive I might have been wasting it) why he thought that. He pointed out that NO contemporary treatment for ocular melanoma had a survival rate much above 50% at five years, which meant there was little point in spending $2.5 million to establish to four-decimal-point instead of two-decimal-point statistically-correct accuracy that we had no effective way to treat ocular melanoma.
I had no answer to him then, and I find upon reviewing it now that I still don't.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.