Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7011|Nårvei

karma wrote:

Yesterday 22:57:18
+1
An island made by global warming ! I actually think it is an interesting article: this post --> http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopi c.php?pid=1373198#p1373198 ; not so; more typical blister/Lib-slayer/ATG/etc rhetoric.
Where does it say you send it ?

We could go to and fro about this for days and create another 150 posts so it gets into the hall of fame !

I said i was sorry if i misunderstood and you keep going on and on and on ................ i grant you the victory of the hole deal if that makes you happy !
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
topal63
. . .
+533|6920

Varegg wrote:

karma wrote:

Yesterday 22:57:18
+1
An island made by global warming ! I actually think it is an interesting article: this post --> http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 8#p1373198 ; not so; more typical blister/Lib-slayer/ATG/etc rhetoric.
Where does it say you send it ?

We could go to and fro about this for days and create another 150 posts so it gets into the hall of fame !

I said i was sorry if i misunderstood and you keep going on and on and on ................ i grant you the victory of the hole deal if that makes you happy !
Are you blind?

I have done more than enough to explain it to you. Also while you have been blathering on about one-singular comment - I have been giving you information and links to sources about Global Warming and the rhetoric employed against it, or haven't you noticed. I have tried to re-rail your fixated self de-rail.

From posts in this thread. Stop being fixated on one comment and ignoring everything else.
From post link (#2), I am interested in what happened after a real debate.
(... with a couple of the so-called Skeptic's Stars: M. Crichton & R. Lindzen.)
http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/Tr … 031407.pdf
A real debate was ineffective against even weak rhetoric tactics. More people were confused after the debate and changed their minds about Global Warming. A personal blog of the participating scientists - indicated they were not sure that actual reasoning is effective against tactics that attempt to muddle an issue rather than elucidate.
&
Here is a blog covering some of the typical rhetoric (muddled arguments) employed:
List by category:
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/ … egory.html

General list:
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/ … eptic.html

Last edited by topal63 (2007-04-25 08:23:21)

SplinterStrike
Roamer
+250|6612|Eskimo land. AKA Canada.
Thats awesome. Iceland also happens to be near the Atlantic volcano belt, so I'm not really surprised. If "global warming" is actually going to happen as they say, that island should be underwater in no time.

On the note about the cellphones killing bees by confusing their navigation system, don't you wish cellphones attracted them instead? Then the next time you're at the movies and that dumb fuck in front of you starts talking on it... *bzzzzzzz* "WHAT THE FUCK?" *massive stinging and bloodshed* /me continues enjoying the movie.
topal63
. . .
+533|6920
Coincidentally, last night, I watched this “Frontline” piece, regarding the Politics of Global Warming, on PBS.

“Hot Politics”
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline … 2007-04-25

Video feeds (for the full program):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline … tics/view/
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7042|Cologne, Germany

Varegg wrote:

karma wrote:

Yesterday 22:57:18
+1
An island made by global warming ! I actually think it is an interesting article: this post --> http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopi c.php?pid=1373198#p1373198 ; not so; more typical blister/Lib-slayer/ATG/etc rhetoric.
Where does it say you send it ?

We could go to and fro about this for days and create another 150 posts so it gets into the hall of fame !

I said i was sorry if i misunderstood and you keep going on and on and on ................ i grant you the victory of the hole deal if that makes you happy !
I assure you, that karma was from topal. Let it go, will ya ? He made it clear that his comment here http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 7#p1373237 was not directed at you, but rather at the couple of guys directly above his comment.

How about getting back on topic ?
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7011|Nårvei

Hm .... the wisest man i know on the forum have spoken and given an assessment like i asked him to, not the answered i hoped for but so be it !

Again i`m sorry for the inconvenience of not having English as my native language thus not always being able to comprehend a slight misinterpretation before it is to late - was just about to delete this thread as it is completely off topic but Schuss asked me to reconsider and i`ll let it stay like it is both for the sake of the original intention and that it is a valuable lesson in communication !

Have a lovely evening
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Lost Hope
Lurker
+20|6528|Brussels, Belgium

Varegg wrote:

Hm .... the wisest man i know on the forum have spoken and given an assessment like i asked him to, not the answered i hoped for but so be it !

Again i`m sorry for the inconvenience of not having English as my native language thus not always being able to comprehend a slight misinterpretation before it is to late - was just about to delete this thread as it is completely off topic but Schuss asked me to reconsider and i`ll let it stay like it is both for the sake of the original intention and that it is a valuable lesson in communication !

Have a lovely evening
I think that misunderstandings is the biggest cause of flame wars in this sub forum.

I sometimes don't post because I'm not sure if my sentences will be understood.
https://bf3s.com/sigs/9c9f8f6ff3579a4c711aa54bbb9e928ec0786003.png
topal63
. . .
+533|6920

Varegg wrote:

Hm .... the wisest man i know on the forum have spoken and given an assessment like i asked him to, not the answered i hoped for but so be it !

Again i`m sorry for the inconvenience of not having English as my native language thus not always being able to comprehend a slight misinterpretation before it is to late - was just about to delete this thread as it is completely off topic but Schuss asked me to reconsider and i`ll let it stay like it is both for the sake of the original intention and that it is a valuable lesson in communication !

Have a lovely evening
Regardless, haven't you noticed I have tried to ignore your own self-de-railing of this thread, and TRIED to direct you towards links about the political rhetoric leveled against Global Warming as an Issue.

In addition the "melting of glaciers," snow/ice-packs, etc, is not just a remote issue (to Greenland). Some places depend upon the natural (seasonal) cycle of melting snow/ice-packs (run-off) as a major component of their water supply. So it [the article] is evidence of a serious issue.

Global Warming Will Reduce Future Water Supply, Study Finds:
(Researchers predict shrinking glaciers, snow pack will reduce water availability)
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/displ … p0.7617456

Last edited by topal63 (2007-04-25 10:01:06)

Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7011|Nårvei

Also from the independent !

Beckett defends UN debate on climate change and conflict
By Edith M Lederer
Published: 18 April 2007

The UN Security Council held a groundbreaking debate yesterday on the impact of climate change on conflicts, in spite of objections from developing countries that global warming was not an issue of international peace and security.

Britain holds the council presidency this month and organised an open meeting to highlight what the Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, said was the "security imperative" to tackle climate change because it can threaten the entire planet.

The two major groups representing developing countries - the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 - wrote separate letters accusing the Security Council of "ever-increasing encroachment" on the role of other UN organs. Climate change and energy are issues for the General Assembly, where all 192 UN member states are represented, and the Economic and Social Council, not the Security Council, they said.

Pakistan's deputy ambassador, Farukh Amil, said the debate "compromises the rights of the general membership of the UN".

Mrs Beckett said she understood the reservations, but added: "This is an issue that threatens the peace and security of the whole planet, and the Security Council has to be the right place to debate it."AP

Other links from the Indipendent:

Last edited by Varegg (2007-04-25 10:38:33)

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard