Alexander Carpenter
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
If AFKTT’s “science” were as well-developed as his invective, abuse, badgering, and shaming skills, he would just shut up as having no basis for his fear-mongering. Mean and nasty, with no space for learning new insights and admitting error, and committed to (imprisoned in?) his premises and rhetoric, AFKTT just tries to beat up those who are more astute than he and his “owners” about the realities of our changing climate. What an asshole.
Dr. D, Raul, and others have it right, AFKTT and his “sources” have it wrong, but in service to some agenda they cannot (or at least do not) acknowledge. What is it? ‘Fess up…
Perhaps he is projecting when he proposes that the climate common-sense of the commenters here who do know the actual science is undermining the credibility of the rest of the content and analysis here at TAE. Maybe that is part of his own conscious intention.
Otherwise why so much vitriol about “fake narratives” and our failure to suck up to his own.
Shame on him for making an absolutist obsession about some crackpot “doom” into such a rant supported only by “factoids” out of context and/or simply wrong.
Since authentic climate science (as imperfect as it is) is readily available were he to look, the only credible explanation for his rants and bullying is that he has an ulterior motive and is serving some covert agenda with evil intent. Why? Qui bono?Error: Slow down; you move too fast.
Error: Duplicate reply detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that.OK, sorry. But do put my first comment in, in order, please. Typing in a small moving bus can be twitchy…
Oh, and Observer, while less shrill, isn’t doing much better at the basic science, either.
What’s it gonna take to get folks to pay attention? After all, all the essential information is readily available a few clicks away online.
It is complicated, and requires some intelligence to comprehend, and there is a lot we haven’t figured out yet, but the broad strokes are known. And – more important for now — we can definitely falsify the Carbon Cult hysteria-hypotheses and experience some modicum of confident sanity.Also note the extensive comments providing valuable-overview perspective (much like here at TAE).
What’s it gonna take to shut up the retard neurotics, hidden-agenda ideologues, and presstitutes?
Dr. D, such an expectation of AFKTT has already been falsified, for there is already plenty of information that demolishes his beliefs, and no factual evidence that supports them. None at all… so they are some kind of neurotic fascination with doom and an identity-prop that requires projection of folly or even evil onto those with more sense who would dare to oppose his scenario.
aspnaz: The factual statement is “Some Jews used terrorism to…”
Others didn’t.
Also, perhaps it’s fair to mention that some non-Jews used terrorism to…
And others didn’t.
Gosh, how definitive.
Are you a prisoner of your abstractions? Sure seems that way.For those of us not paying attention, those docs are referenced in
https://www.theautomaticearth.com/forums/topic/debt-rattle-june-19-2023/page/2/#post-137309post-post-Modern Paradigm (on pages 4 and 5; the rest is context)
Yes, Jewishness itself is not an indicator of any trait in any given individual. Even less-so is the claim of Jewishness made by that individual or others. Still no identified universal common trait or behavior shared by all Jews — except, perhaps, as projections by others needing a target for their otherwise-amorphous bigotry and unresolved internal tensions. I have lots of problems with many Jews, but none of them are simply because they are Jews (of whatever strain).
Again, sanity requires that we hold people responsible for what they do far more (if at all) than for what they “are,” or corrupted ideology- or agenda-bound abstractions become the basis for choices instead of real-world experience and human resonance.
One fundamental error in our civilization is our failure to accurately comprehend human nature, leading to profound systematic errors and abuses because of incorrect and largely untested premises.
I explore the experiential correcting of this at great length in Human Behavioral Algorithms, with the link to that doc to come in tomorrow’s comments since I am not at my computer. And at the risk of seeming pushy, and with delight at being a creative irritant, I’ll also share the link to another frontier-exploring doc, Epistemological Engineering, since this conversation has flirted with explicit exploring of rudimentary epistemology, another fast-evolving (lots of selecting going on) art-and-science.
It should be clear to all of us here that we are all participating in a time of evolving paradigms, with the post-Modern Paradigm being ever-so-gradually replaced (“one funeral at a time”) by a post-post-Modern paradigm (for which we will eventually devise a snappier name). I suppose I should share a doc that wrestles with that process, too…
And please note that I am not interested in being held as an “authority” on anything, but rather as a fellow-traveler on an adventure into new territory, noting landmarks and their potential import for others to experience and signify for themselves. It’s all there, folks, right in front of, and inside, us, often tediously complex and tentative upon first encounter. Sorry about that…And Wikipedia? Not a reliable authority about anything controversial. Not only not authoritative, but also completely corruptible.
The Khazari “thing” started around a thousand years ago.Awkward dance moves are not unique to hipster-whitey, however recognizable that is in them (whoever that might be).
And AFKTT is projecting his own religious-zealotry neurosis yet again, as well as his own anti-whatever and his “well-established” beliefs. Is his “non-science” anti-science, or just nonsense?
So far, I have not found, nor has anyone been able to identify for me, any one trait, or set of traits, that are exclusive to Jews, whatever strain of “Jew” we might focus on. Ditto for any other tribe. Come to think of it, only an individual human can be “unique,” and then only in largely trivial ways, least of all biologically/genetically, then increasing tidbits into the cultural, social, and personal levels.
At the levels of “magic” and “will” there can be all-consuming takeovers by what we from the outside call “evil,” and these in context seem to make the difference between those who care for others and those who don’t. Warped-concentric layers of relation-eligible others connect nearby, and then it’s narcissism and projection all the way out.
The social engineers contrive to substitute an ideology/agenda-based identification for aligning the lost and feckless into a twitching wave of amorphous power given form and direction by the engineers.
And we are back to “Just say ‘No’” if we can first feel, and then see, and then articulate, the racket. Except by serendipitous accident, we can’t escape the fortress/prison of our beliefs and identifications until we figure out that we are in it, locked in, for the vast majority of folks.
As my grandmother used to say, “Watch that first step, it’s a Doozey.”Honest Sorcerer is asking the correct three questions. However, before asking those three questions it is vitally important to ask a set of more important questions — to question one’s premises themselves.
When one’s premises are wrong, one will ask the wrong questions, get the wrong answers, and reach the wrong conclusions (and believe in them, especially if the premises are belief-based).
Without reality-testing one’s premises, it’s all just another onanism of “reasonableness” and confirmation-bias.https://www.unz.com/article/an-appeal-to-readers-stop-the-obsession-with-jews/
Perhaps the euphemism we should use is “red herring.”
Both DBS and Nancy Reagan: “Just say ‘no.’”
Walking away can be the hardest part, and the most “discouraged.”AFKTT: Here’s some information-tending-toward-knowledge:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/?s=Antarctic+sea+iceAFKTT: Wow! One-year change. So effin’ what? Without context, this is just noise. Even with context, this is still just noise. This is like the retards whining about their dread 0.1% ocean-acidification pH change when the routine daily pH ranges 10% or more.
Please learn to tell the differences between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom.
Why do I have the sense that these days everyone around here is waiting for some “other shoe” to drop. What other shoes are hovering? Don’t get me started…
But I am sure that each of us has her (or whatever) favorite, carefully chosen to gratify some desperate longing for resolution, to express some insider resonance, or to be “right” about something, anything, at last.
Are we waiting for The Mob to awaken to increasingly obvious facts and even truths? What if the latency period before we “Snap out of it!” above some critical-mass level to shift us all off our meta-stable hovering?
If most people, even the more-powerful, are waiting for the real decision-makers to decide and decree, even if they don’t know exactly who those are, then we might be in an unresolvable iterative loop of “waiting for Godot” until someone(s) break the stasis because they are frustrated and impatient, manically narcissistic, projecting their own death-wish, or seeking revenge on their ancestors. Or whatever.
How many ways are there for us to be crazy, compared with how many ways to be sane? On that basis alone, we are standing in front of the fan with nowhere else, really, to go, and half blind because we can’t or won’t recognize the fan or the creatures hovering above it.
Traditional wisdom has us tending the garden; our post-Post-Modernist paradigm has us growing pot in it.
OK, folks, take a deep breath now, and then another, and then…And DarkMatter, offering a compromised-data “Here’s a NOAA sea temperature graph” as a… just exactly what? That, and all its ilk, merit a “So what?” since their presentation includes neither premises nor context, just pretend “science” and neurotic fright-wig projection.
Were we more contemptuous of their gropings, we might ask, “So fuuckin’ what?” But we give them some credit for trying to deal with the world, even if they can’t see it straight, or explain what they are claiming the “meaning” and significance are.
“Average,” indeed! A good start at meaningless nonsense. Since nothing in Nature engages the “average” of anything, and since most of the “averages” in the Carbon Cult are meaningless even in its own terms (such as “average global temperature”), this tells us that the graph is nonsense without multiple pages of background and context — and even with.
For perspective, try drawing that graphic with the left-hand axis starting at 0 K, and see how much less significant it looks. Then extend it to cover multiple cycles in time, for the same result.
Next you will use an “anomaly,” another way to exaggerate the import of otherwise meaningless and even boring information. Nothing in Nature engages with “anomalies,” either. Ho, hum…
So what? as an actual, non-rhetorical question Is the only sensible way to relate to the Cultists and the Know-Nothings, returning to them responsibility to explain and justify their posturings and claims. As with their predictions, they fail. Instead, they over-generalize, catastrophize, and resort to ad hominem nit-picking.
It occurs to me that there is some deep origin-drive similarity between this sort of sleazy rhetoric and woke identity-politics, in that it provides empty unexamined gratification for its advocates, is stuck in abstractions and absolutes, while pretending at significance and missing the essence of their relationships with the real world.AFKTT’s predictions are right in there with all (and that means ALL) the other predictions of the climate-doom fetishists: 100% wrong. So that tells us that what he and his fantasies deserve is our scorn and ridicule for being such a sucker (another one born every minute) prattling such hysterical simple-minded nonsense.
The genuine science is available for those who wish a responsible investigation of a matter of sufficient complexity that most (including AFKTT?) can’t wrap their minds around it. But it doesn’t meet the emotional needs of fear-addicts and political-agenda minions.
I wish, though, that it would keep them off the airwaves and quiet in the peanut galleries, but that’s obviously expecting too much.And the greatest “too much” is that they might ever explicitly identify their premises, those assumptions that when revealed demolish their “reasonableness.” Too bad, so sad…Bosco, you might try looking at the actual data from NOAA and comparing that with their “statement.” Then look at all their “fudge factors.” Then root out all their unstated assumptions (“premises”), and then see what sense they all make. Good luck with that…
Am I the only one who interpreted polemos’ response to aspenaz as being, in some devious and perhaps overly subtle way, a humorous and satyrical or mocking-imitative reductio ad absurdam parody? In other words, “pulling his leg”?
With aspenaz returning the perfect literal-minded “straight-man” response? Maybe aspenaz was caught “playing the fool.”
One of those two is taking himself way too seriously.If I were a Ukranian general officer, I would hesitate to initiate any general attack that might generate ethnic-Russian casualties. Were I that general’s boss, ditto. And then…?
There’s a lot of “eventually” before we get to the Western capitals.
Perhaps it’s no wonder that the “war” is now one of words, and is not “kinetic.”
“Putin” plays a great waiting-game, and is more credible for accomplishing “his” stated aims than the cowboys on the other side.
It will be interesting to watch the foldings we expect, from one or both sides.src=”https://autoearth.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/BlackRockFox2.jpg”
alt=”A clue to what’s behind the surface “story”…” />What’s behind this story is that because there’s an (internal) “settlement,” there will be no trial, no discovery, and no evidence revealed for all the world to see.
So there’s a lot more at stake than the money, and Tucker Carlson is a footnote (and I am certain that he will take full advantage of this).
Yes, the Carbon Cult is mental, it is a form of madness. It is hypocritical, in that it relies on invective and “factoids,” while ignoring the actual science, which professes none of the dread certainty that its pretend followers claim. And some (many?) of the Cultists are just opportunists toadying to the backers of the “standard narrative.” Or neurotic children needing a fix of fear.
I am actually proud of those of us here who display the sanity to see through the lies and hysteria of the Cultists and their owners. Climate is a difficult and complex domain; it is poorly understood, so real science is very humble in its claims. We can, however falsify errant claims, so we know with some certainty what isn’t happening with changing climate, even if we aren’t sure about what is — and the Carbon Cult noise has been definitively falsified.
This process is a microcosm of the larger abuse with other fear-mongeries and manipulations. In fact, the more and closer we look, the more we see that the mythologies of our civilization are like that, and that we are steeped in lies and distortions. Where will it end? Let’s find out together, and we are doing a good job so far.And once again, I am posting a comprehensive climate-change doc that addresses all the issues in tedious detail:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0vrpxs5olpserhx/Do%20You%20%22Believe%22%20in%20Climate%20Change%3F.docx?dl=0And I offer this in a larger context of ontology and epistemology:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8vnz3ml5z730mds/Epistemological%20Engineering.docx?dl=0Thanks to us all for our hard-won sanities…
AFKTT: Wrong in every detail, and overall. Wrong, wrong,wrong. What’s it gonna take? A lobotomy?
All the actual science is readily available, despite the manipulation, suppression, outright censorship, and hysteria. None are so blind as those who refuse to look…AFKTT is just so very good at demonstrating projection. Most trivially, calling folks “fuckwits” is a start at the pure ad hom fuckwittery he whines about in others; and then using Wikipedia as an “authoritative source” takes fuckwittery to a high level of onanism, given the corrupt abuse of Wikipedia’s open content-architecture by drones such as William Connolly, who is famous for ideologizing as many entries as possible with the carbon Cult pseudo-science. Better, non-science, also known as nonsense. And AFKTT complains about other’s lack of “substantive science” in their comments (despite so many condensing its essence into a few commonsensical truth-telling words)….
When will he learn to just STFU about this? Never is most likely, revealing severe obsessive neurosis and suggesting covert agendas.
But I repeat myself (just like AFKTT).
Drone, drone…Jb-hb is correct, in that at least about the climate nonsense he spouts so dogmatically and fake-authoritatively, AFKTT is quite the fetishist retard. His aggressive-defensive and childishly sleazy invective is an embarrassment on this site, and many of us here are increasingly aware of that — and also aware of what the genuine “climate science” tells us, which isn’t much, and certainly does not justify the cheap-thrills panic and posturing we get from the peanut gallery. That is really just systematic lies hiding behind half-truths and factoids taken out of context (i.e., the real world), and given what we do know, it represents willful ignorance and corrupt ass-kissing to some agenda that we are also increasingly figuring out. So AFKTT is a plant, an ingratiating spy, betraying his own integrity and seeking to subvert ours. Shame on him.
And after all those stupid lies, we can’t believe anything he says. Perhaps he has some sort of death-wish, and even lies to himself about that. Perhaps it is barricaded rage corroding his own self, since he can’t make it stick out there…chooch: If there was a “Fauci Award”, I think I know who A. Carpenter would nominate.
I’m thinking that you mean AFKTT, but that’s just a guess. And no, as far as I can tell, Fauci seems to be a socio- and psycho-pathic liar (compounded by hypocrisy and corruption — and/or maybe a fanatical adherent to some pernicious/evil ideology or agenda), while AFKTT seems to be “merely” neurotic in clinging to anomalous arbitrary beliefs and posturing to “rationalize” them.
The best thing we can do for ourselves is challenge, in a systematic and responsible way, our beliefs. First, and perhaps most difficult, is to recognize them as such, for they usually masquerade as identity-myth-confirming knowledge. Then, well, check out the Epistemological Engineering doc for the rest…And for those folks who might seek to look deeper into the failures of our current science paradigm, and what to do about them (and other failures, of identification and affiliation, of individual and collective responsibility, and of sanity itself), I offer this draft Epistemological Engineering, an overview of what is the largest-context most-fundamental challenge facing our civilization these days: how to think and know about the real world instead of believe in arbitrary subsets of it. In other words, how to develop and apply a complexity-aware paradigm instead of the algorithm-bound “standard-narrative” post-Modern paradigm. This is a major challenge, with much riding on its engagement and resolution:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8vnz3ml5z730mds/Epistemological%20Engineering.docx?dl=0
And considering a different (yet related and parallel) paradigm shift about human nature itself (as indicated by human behavior), here’s a tidbit about that mysterious notion, “algorithmic behavior,” to dispel another set of largely nonsensical beliefs such as tabula rasa and even (sort-of) free will. Enjoy these potential liberations…
https://www.dropbox.com/s/g7e8qg9vxac9nkm/Human%20Behavioral%20Algorithms.docx?dl=0
And if you can’t, then suffer on.
Since we are now including more faith-based Carbon Cult nonsense from Ugo Bardi (another otherwise-astute observer), I will once again remind us of this “curriculum” for reviewing the state of what is so ambitiously, and so undeservedly, called “climate science.” After giving this admittedly snarky screed an honest study, and attending a sufficiency of its links, no person with any scientific competence or integrity (or even common sense) could maintain that this nascent science has any legitimate basis to make any sweeping statements about climate-change, especially those with public-policy implications. In fact one might conclude that this politicized “science” is from scratch a policy and agenda driver.
For whom, exactly, is unclear, as unclear as the pretend science itself. No facile answers here, folks, move along, now…Alas, AFKTT, all that effort to no avail: still wrong after all these years. When your premises are wrong, you will (have, evidently) ask the wrong questions, get the wrong answers, and reach the wrong conclusions — and believe in them (especially if the premises are belief-based).
This is ever-more-true when addressing complex non-linear open systems from within a reductionist linearizing paradigm, as is evident you have.
Should you wish, I would be happy to once agin share with you (and all) a “curriculum” such as I have described and recommended in my most-recent comment, even though you have evidenced no open-mindedness to such an engagement.
Aggressive-defensive braggadocio will never substitute for truth (as opposed to “Truth”). Recall Einstein, in responding to a book entitled something like 100 Scientists Prove Einstein Wrong, saying something like “If I were wrong, all it would take is one.”
So far, you ain’t the one.I an truly sorry, AFKTT, that you are unable to investigate the realities for yourself on this issue. Were you to do so, you would not have to prattle your non-evidence and invective and could remember that others have done actual science and dispelled the miasma of belief into which the Carbon Cult seduces the unwary. All those “anti-whatevers,” and yet those of us who are paying attention to the real world don’t have to be “anti,” since the facts are available for all who look. Why haven’t you? What is your need to believe (with consequent rants)?
What is preventing you from abandoning this cultish belief-structure, and looking deeper below the lies pretending to be “science”?
There is no physical evidence whatsoever that human activities affect global climate. None.
There is lots of politicized fake “evidence” that doesn’t hold up to scientific examination, but evidently fools you (or allows you to fool yourself). Why?
We all share serious real-world challenges, and the blather you drivel (or is it the drivel you blather?) just makes it more difficult for many to see the genuine challenges and address them sensibly, which serves the liars’ overall agenda. You are their fake-smart tool, their dupe, their servant, even if you appear to accurately see through some of their lies.
This is a puzzlement. Were you my student, I would assign you an arbitrary task, to prepare a coherent, well-researched thesis that is the antithesis of your beliefs in this matter, starting by setting them aside and then researching from tabula rasa scratch. Taking the “other side” in this “debate.” Presenting fairly what just might turn out to be a refutation of them. From that process, you could see a whole ‘nother reality, a larger reality, and any native integrity you possess would compel you to shift your stance out of monomaniacal belief and into an actual scientific perspective that is not so dogmatic and obsessive (and desperately shrill).
But that might be a bridge too far, too erosive of some identity-myth, too sane.So AFKTT is still twitching in his neurotic CAGW onanism, despite the fact that it is not only just flat wrong as science, but is stupid as a religion, suicidal as policy, and hypocritical as environmentalism.
What’s it gonna take to get him off this foolish fetish of farcical fallacy? If it truly represents his ground of being and his relating to the world, then everything derived from that premise is crippled by that error, along with his overall credibility in every other domain.
How differently would we regard Michael Hudson or Colonel MacGregor were we to learn that on the side they espoused the Q-Anon beliefs, practiced secret rituals in a genital-mutilation cult, or (horrors) could actually define “woman”?
The Carbon Cult is yet another fear-mongering manipulation of the divide-and-conquer debilitation powers, and that should be obvious to any adult observer (however rare those might be anymore). It is, simply, a willful lie, and all who repeat it are dupes, and self-deluding liars as well.
Enough!DBS: The correct disposition of the Ukrainian territories (which I’m certain Russia understands very clearly) will be to incorporate back into Russia all of those areas in which the majority consider themselves to be citizens of the Nation that calls itself Russia. All of the “non-Russian” areas, populated by people with a strong sense of identification as Ukrainians, would then become Ukraine. This “new” Ukraine would then be an actual nation, and as such it would have to conduct itself in a manner which its neighbors could tolerate and/or deal with appropriately . . . . just like every other nation on the frigging planet has to do all of the time, including now.
The trouble comes from all those significant regions where a majority of the people identify as neither Russian nor Ukrainian: the Poles around Lviv, the Hungarians in the Trans…whatever, the Romanians in another Trans.., the Moldavians in yet another Trans.., and the Byelorussians in the north. And maybe others…
When these have all met their fate, who knows what might remain and what should be done with it.
I am certain that there is a faction in the Kremlin that would like to see “The Ukraine” entirely disappear off the face of the earth, as a suitable fate and just karma for its wicked past.
And never forget that “the Ukrainians” are about as Russian as anyone, in terms of ethnicity, language, culture, and subtextual essences, with only relative minor tribal differences, so returning them back within “Mother Russia” would have historical resonances and anchors and could become the least of their concerns.
Again, we foresee some delicate balancing-acts.
