We're excited to present a great new set of boards to classic movie fans with tons of new features, stability, and performance.

If you’re new to the message boards, please “Register” to get started. If you want to learn more about the new boards, visit our FAQ.

Register

If you're a returning member, start by resetting your password to claim your old display name using your email address.

Re-Register

Thanks for your continued support of the TCM Message Boards.

X

Kyle Kersten was a true friend of TCM. One of the first and most active participants of the Message Boards, “Kyle in Hollywood” (aka, hlywdkjk) demonstrated a depth of knowledge and largesse of spirit that made him one of the most popular and respected voices in these forums. This thread is a living memorial to his life and love of movies, which remain with us still.

X

Jump to content


Photo

Stupid Science


  • Please log in to reply
599 replies to this topic

#21 scsu1975

scsu1975

    Tor B the Man

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,317 posts
  • LocationEd Wood movie

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:57 PM

Paleontologists Discover Unexpected Evolutionary Missing Link

 

V8orVWw.jpg

I was wondering what ever happened to Darryl Hannah.


  • hamradio and Sepiatone like this

I'm a big boy.


#22 NipkowDisc

NipkowDisc

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,461 posts
  • Locationzaygon hegemony

Posted 20 March 2017 - 05:41 PM

Paleontologists Discover Unexpected Evolutionary Missing Link

 

V8orVWw.jpg

:lol:


"okay, so we're moving right along, folks" -al pacino, dog day afternoon


#23 SansFin

SansFin

    U. S. Citizen

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 03:50 PM

Paleontologists Discover Unexpected Evolutionary Missing Link

 

V8orVWw.jpg


My Avatar: Little girl ghost from "義足のMoses"

 

Russian nesting dolls are full of themselves.


#24 LawrenceA

LawrenceA

    Champion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • LocationThereabouts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 05:16 PM

Says the facts. 

 

Okay. 

 

Like I said, a pointless discussion. 



#25 SansFin

SansFin

    U. S. Citizen

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 05:12 PM

Says Exxon-Mobil, BP, and Shell.

 

 

Says the facts. 


My Avatar: Little girl ghost from "義足のMoses"

 

Russian nesting dolls are full of themselves.


#26 hamradio

hamradio

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,154 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 01:32 PM

Hey, what are we worried about.  It only takes a few hundreds of millions of years for the earth to naturally develop more oil and coal.  The heck with wind and solar.

 

They might be wrong on how oil is made.

 

http://www.livescien...supply-oil.html

 

https://www.usnews.c...worth-exploring

 

image1.png



#27 LawrenceA

LawrenceA

    Champion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • LocationThereabouts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 01:15 PM

 'Green Policies' commonly depress the economy.

 

Says Exxon-Mobil, BP, and Shell.



#28 SansFin

SansFin

    U. S. Citizen

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 01:11 PM

If you're right and there is no anthropogenic global warming, doing nothing still achieves nothing, but following green practices still makes the world a cleaner, better place for generations to come. 

 

 

To follow the carbon-neutral craze lowers quality of life and limits innovation. Inappropriate restrictions on power generation, agriculture and various other industries raises prices while limiting supply. This makes development of reasonable alternatives more difficult and reduces investments by placing the burden of support on government funding rather than private capital.

 

A thriving economy produces more opportunities and even fringe concepts find investors willing to risk a little excess capital. 'Green Policies' commonly depress the economy.


My Avatar: Little girl ghost from "義足のMoses"

 

Russian nesting dolls are full of themselves.


#29 Bogie56

Bogie56

    Prof. Knucklehead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,540 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 19 March 2017 - 12:31 PM

Hey, what are we worried about.  It only takes a few hundreds of millions of years for the earth to naturally develop more oil and coal.  The heck with wind and solar.



#30 LawrenceA

LawrenceA

    Champion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • LocationThereabouts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 11:43 AM

 

I would suggest that you read: The Half-life of Facts: Why Everything We Know Has an Expiration Date by Samuel Arbesman. It explains how mistakes become entrenched in the scientific community. 

 

None of which refutes my assertion that the world would be a better place if green practices were put into place and adhered to, regardless of the veracity of global warming rhetoric. If I'm right about global warming, and we do nothing, then we're in for a rough time. If I'm right, and we do something, that rough time would be somewhat alleviated. If you're right and there is no anthropogenic global warming, doing nothing still achieves nothing, but following green practices still makes the world a cleaner, better place for generations to come. 

 

I know from past experience that debating or even discussing this issue is a pointless endeavor, so I don't know why I bothered again this time. I'll try to refrain in the future and let you guys have at it.


  • Bogie56 likes this

#31 SansFin

SansFin

    U. S. Citizen

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 02:09 AM

I'm glad the word of one guy is enough for you. I may need a little more. 

 

 

I consider it a basis when he was one of the world's leading scientists and the foremost authority on climate to the extent that he is credited with establishing it as a science. It is especially convincing to me when he first attributed climate change to man's activities and then changed that because his further research proved it was not true.

 

German chemist Erich von Wolf misplaced a decimal point in 1870. It was by that mistake that generations of scientists learned and later taught that spinach contains ten times the iron which it actually has. Similar mistakes have been made in the fields of medicine, physics, paleontology and perhaps every other discipline. Dr. Bryson learned that the effect of carbon dioxide was not nearly as great as he had first estimated. Other scientists failed to heed this and continue to use high values for the effect it has. Those scientists taught others who taught others. That is how mistakes propagate in the scientific community and become entrenched.

 

There is more than one climate model because each researcher inserts values which they believe may be true. Every climate model which attributes a high value to the effect of carbon dioxide failed to predict the increase in antarctic ice sheets. Dr. R. Bryson's climate model contained a very low value for the effect of carbon dioxide and accurately predicted the gains.

 

The typical professor adds five PHd-candidates each year to maintain an average stable of a little more than sixteen under his direct control. The average grant in climatology is $487,400. This means that a typical professor controls an eight million dollar budget. The vast majority of that money and the prestige which comes with it would disappear if climate change was acknowledged as natural. 

 

Dr. R. Bryson's years of work after he retired from controlling such monies adds great credence to his statements for me. Professors who gain prestige by expanding their departments and who hold power by handling such sums have less credibility in my eyes. This is particularly true when their climate models always fail to accurately predict changes and most run around like silly hens screaming that disaster is imminent and spend more time talking to reporters than they do in their laboratories.

 

The effects of grant money to support carbon dioxide theories is particularly disturbing in today's academic environment:

"Thus, getting grants has eclipsed the old refrain of “publish or perish.” Whereas it still may be true that deans can count but not read, nowadays they count the number of grants and add up the overhead generated rather than the number of publications. Should faculty members be judged on the basis of what they do or how many grants they bring in? At many universities, endowed chairs, along with named and distinguished professorships, are about external funding, not distinguished records of creative research. Titled professorships are being bought and sold on the basis of extramural support." - Gordon G. Gallup Jr. and Bruce B. Svare in: Hijacked by an External Funding Mentality  https://www.insidehi...et-grants-essay

 

I would suggest that you read: The Half-life of Facts: Why Everything We Know Has an Expiration Date by Samuel Arbesman. It explains how mistakes become entrenched in the scientific community. 


My Avatar: Little girl ghost from "義足のMoses"

 

Russian nesting dolls are full of themselves.


#32 Vautrin

Vautrin

    Quel siecle a mains!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,776 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 18 March 2017 - 11:11 PM

How you too can make millions being a climatologist.

That Ferrari in the driveway. Climatology, baby.  :)


  • NipkowDisc likes this

Curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid get.


#33 LawrenceA

LawrenceA

    Champion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • LocationThereabouts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 10:45 PM

Quotes by Reid Bryson:

 

"There is very little truth to what is being said and an awful lot of religion. It's almost a religion. Where you have to believe in anthropogenic global warming or else you are nuts."

 

"There is a lot of money to be made in this. If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.'"

 

"There is no credible evidence that it is due to mankind and carbon dioxide." 

 

Reid Bryson's credentials as a scientist can be found with ease by Googling "father of climatology”. 

 

I'm glad the word of one guy is enough for you. I may need a little more. 

 

I have no children, so the condition of the world after I'm gone is of little direct concern to me. But that pesky voice in my head that says I should care about my fellow man keeps acting up. And I care a lot more about everyone else's children than I do for Exxon's bottom line. Which is always what the argument boils down to. What's the down side of making the world a cleaner, healthier place through green practices? Even if "anthropogenic global warming" is a fallacy, what is harmed by making the air and water cleaner, or focusing on improving renewable energy sources?  


  • Bogie56 likes this

#34 SansFin

SansFin

    U. S. Citizen

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 10:36 PM

I guess the question becomes who you trust more: the scientific community or the fossil fuel industry.

 

 

Quotes by Reid Bryson:

 

"There is very little truth to what is being said and an awful lot of religion. It's almost a religion. Where you have to believe in anthropogenic global warming or else you are nuts."

 

"There is a lot of money to be made in this. If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.'"

 

"There is no credible evidence that it is due to mankind and carbon dioxide." 

 

Reid Bryson's credentials as a scientist can be found with ease by Googling "father of climatology”. 


My Avatar: Little girl ghost from "義足のMoses"

 

Russian nesting dolls are full of themselves.


#35 Vautrin

Vautrin

    Quel siecle a mains!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,776 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 18 March 2017 - 05:04 PM

It was entirely on topic.  I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
 

Under that system, every argument would be

irrefutable. I prefer to use my own understanding. 


Curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid get.


#36 LawrenceA

LawrenceA

    Champion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • LocationThereabouts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:46 PM

It was entirely on topic.  I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
 

 

Following the money leads right back to the fossil fuel industry, who spends tens (or is it hundreds?) of millions of dollars a year funding ad campaigns and other propaganda efforts to debunk climate change, since switching to more eco-friendly practices would cost them hundreds of millions to implement, not to mention a smaller demand for fossil fuels in general.

 

But I'm guessing that's not what you meant. You seem to lean more toward the "they're making stuff up to win grant money" or "nefarious unscrupulous hypocrites like Al Gore stoke climate change hysteria so that they can make money off of carbon credits and other environmental efforts" camps.

 

I suppose we all belong to one camp or another. I guess the question becomes who you trust more: the scientific community or the fossil fuel industry.



#37 MovieCollectorOH

MovieCollectorOH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • LocationOhio

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:38 PM

Thanks for the non sequitur.

 

It was entirely on topic.  I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
 



#38 Vautrin

Vautrin

    Quel siecle a mains!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,776 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:27 PM

Just follow the money.

Thanks for the non sequitur.


Curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid get.


#39 SansFin

SansFin

    U. S. Citizen

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:16 PM

Is it spacious inside, as in Frankenstein Meets The Space Monster?  Does it have several large rooms, and if you walk around the outer passage way, do you see the unfinished plywood used to construct the set?

^_^

 

It is not so large that one can enter it. The scale of it can be envisioned by the fact that the two visitors pictured waving from under the rim of the 'ship' are approx. two feet tall. 


My Avatar: Little girl ghost from "義足のMoses"

 

Russian nesting dolls are full of themselves.


#40 MovieCollectorOH

MovieCollectorOH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • LocationOhio

Posted 18 March 2017 - 02:37 PM

We have been twice to the Little Green Men Days celebration in Kelly. It is a quite charming little festival. The centerpiece is an UFO made of panels from the roof of a circular corn storage crib! It is in many ways like a county fair reduced to miniature size. 

CiALJQi.jpg

 

Is it spacious inside, as in Frankenstein Meets The Space Monster?  Does it have several large rooms, and if you walk around the outer passage way, do you see the unfinished plywood used to construct the set?

^_^






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users