Me...When you keep twatting on about it! :shrugQuote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeX-SzAICdw
Printable View
Me...When you keep twatting on about it! :shrugQuote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeX-SzAICdw
As usual, the opposite is the reality in US education. The link below is to a thorough piece of research that Infowars would never trouble to engage in. It discovers school text books using sources such as L Ron Hubbard, that on the environment teaches-Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
“Radical environmentalists” don’t just appreciate nature, but they “worship” it. In a pursuit of preservation, environmentalists “view mankind as the enemy of nature.” Environmentalists advocate for laws that hinder the advance of technology.
And claims with regard to Psychology-
What the Abeka textbook says: Satan did not want people worshipping God, so in the late 1800s, Satan hatched “the ideas of evolution, socialism, Marxist-socialism (Communism), progressive education, and modern psychology” to counter America’s increased religiosity.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...b04e96f0c6093c
Far from there being a left-wing conspiracy in US Education, it has become and is becoming a laboratory for backward ideas that strangle thought and progress particularly in the sciences and humanities. Some school do not even teach music presumably because of its association with the devil. And as the article makes clear, it is damaging lives, not just preventing them from realising their full potential.
The less free the markets are, the shittier the services and goods offered at them are and the less you can get for your money. This justifies the use of the argument by free marketers. Fascism is just a form of communism. I like neither types, but fascists seem to be effective against socialists - unfortunately only short-term as they then implement republic or democracy or some other nazism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
It is a pity but probably not surprising that you did not read the survey of education in the US that I linked for you and others to read, because it actually begs the question: is private education, or education in 'voucher schools' that operate on a market basis, offering American children a rounded and balanced education? Moreover, for someone obsessed with indoctrination in all its forms, is it not the case that the examples given are precisely that -indoctrination rather than education?
Are children being given the tools to use to develop the critical faculties which will enable them to weigh the arguments for or against climate change, or are they being indoctrinated when told that Environmentalists advocate for laws that hinder the advance of technology.-?
A core argument that you use, The less free the markets are, the shittier the services and goods offered at them are and the less you can get for your money, is not verified in fact. Indeed, there appear to be cases where a free market in education is a licence for religious groups to make money from parents of the same faith while delivering something so remote from learning that it should probably not be called 'education'. For someone who claims to believe in freedom, you seem relentlessly keen to take it away, even from children.
And I am tempted to wonder how anyone with an education can write-
fascists seem to be effective against socialists - unfortunately only short-term as they then implement republic or democracy or some other nazism.
Schools should be private and parents should be the ones to decide when and if at all to send their children to school.
Talking about giving freedom to children and making them equal to their parents is a complete load of nonsense that I mentioned several times on this board already. I don't expect you to agree, as you are a retarded communist advocate of equality but I am sure any reasonable and responsible parent, who wants best for their kids, would.
As to the nazis socialist and fascist bit - I went to a few public schools q(^.^)p
I never said children should be 'equal to their parents', but what I did do, was cast doubt on the uncritical position you take on 'free market' education even when there are well documented cases -in the UK as well as the US- where the quality of education provided by the private sector is so poor it is barely worth the name education. I don't -or I ought not to- name the schools in question but let us just say they are religious schools, without damning all religious schools such as the ones we have in this country which have been centres of excellence for decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
But you don't want to admit there are flaws at all in the private sector because you don't approach this subject in a practical manner with any evidence of an interest in education and how it takes place, but as an ideological campaign for 'free markets' which is little different from the doctrinaire education some American students receive that insist that evolution is wrong because we are all here by God's Design and must therefore Obey God's Laws. Do you obey God's Laws?
We could if we choose list all the people who went to state schools in the UK or the US who have been successful at what they do, be it in science and engineering, the arts and politics, even in education and so on and so on, but why bother when you could not care less about achievements of any kind, but merely trade your nihilist fantasy for attention?
Have a go at the private education claim and show us how brilliant you are:
Environmentalists advocate for laws that hinder the advance of technology. Discuss.
California's hellish fires: a visit from the Ghost of Christmas Future
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ristmas-future
From The Guardian
The Ghosts of Christmas past , present and future were able to change Ebenezer Scrooge because he was just a normal guy who appeared to be suffering from an obsessive - compulsive personality disorder as evidenced by his hoarding money and his extreme work ethic.
It appears that Mr. Scrooge experienced a brief psychotic episode ( the ghosts and delusional thinking ) as people with personality disorders are more at risk of experiencing psychotic episodes than the general population .
Most likely triggered by the stress of the holiday season , and lack of friends and a family support system.
Although Mr. Scrooge is now in a highly emotional state and giving away large sums of money, he does not appear to be a danger to himself or others .
LOL
Pity the same can't be said for the sociopath in the White House .
Dickens may be seen as the product of his Victorian environment, in his fiction often drowning the reader in a glue of emotion that seems designed to expunge the guilt of the person concerned; as a man indifferent even cruel to the woman he married who was pregnant at least twelve times and bore him children who, once they had got past the 'fun part' of being children were dismissed by their dad as failures. Dickens in middle age had an affair with an 18-year old actress, and was a regular visitor with his friend the author Wilkie Collins to those areas of London and Paris most known for their 'women of ill-repute' -one could imagine him these days spending a fortnight every year in Thailand, and not just for the climate and the food.Quote:
Originally Posted by sukumvit boy
Dickens was often good with words, not so good with stories which go on and on and on; he depicts the sharp distinctions between poverty and wealth in mid-19th century London, appearing to side with the poor against the rich, but in politics he was a coward as the relief from poverty does not come from political action, but when it comes seems like magic or the lottery to be the sudden revelation that a distant uncle who went to America or Australia has left the character a fortune, though one notes Pip's sour dismissal of Magwitch at the end of Great Expectations as a sign that maybe Dickens also had a fetish for money that laces gratitude with resentment.
Dickens has been described as a misogynist and a bad father in the two links below.
One also notes that the environment became a political and social issue in Dicken's time, and that the stinking slums in which his characters lived, notably in Little Dorrit and Oliver Twist, were part of a problem that increased over the 19th century as economic growth attracted more people to the city, as well as immigrants from Italy and the Russian Empire toward the end of the century. Slum landlords made a fortune out of other people's misery.
It was during Dicken's time that London began to build the network of sewers which still exist today, as well as a multitude of ornate public lavatories, most of which have gone, in an attempt to make the city a healthier place in which to live, the turning point being, perhaps, the celebrated moment in 1854 when John Snow removed the handle of a water pump on Broad Street (these days, Broadwick Street) having identified it as the source of a cholera outbreak in the city.
Hard to believe that issues around something as basic as water, can in the 21st century result in a country as rich as the USA being unable to provide clean drinking water to every household. Whatever the long term effects of climate change might be on coastal areas and cities like New Orleans and Miami, easy access to drinking water remains one of the planet's greatest challenges; drinking 12 diet cokes a day is no substitute.
http://observer.com/2012/12/daddy-is...arles-dickens/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/aut...iam-margolyes/
I can testify to and share your assessment of their interminable length, having suffered through an eighth grade English teacher who had us read both Great Expectations and David Copperfield. As far as English class went, eighth grade was an interminable year. I’m guessing these stories ramble on so because they were published in installments and were followed the same way people follow soaps on TV today - they were the soap operas of the day.Quote:
Dickens was often good with words, not so good with stories which go on and on and on;...
Ironic too that the bigoted wall builders who decry porous borders and hold other cultures in distain, never give a second thought to the increased pressure climate change will place on those walls and borders.Quote:
Hard to believe that issues around something as basic as water, can in the 21st century result in a country as rich as the USA being unable to provide clean drinking water to every household. Whatever the long term effects of climate change might be on coastal areas and cities like New Orleans and Miami, easy access to drinking water remains one of the planet's greatest challenges; drinking 12 diet cokes a day is no substitute.
Everyone likes their strippers glistening with glitter, right? I never even asked myself the question what the fuck glitter is made of. Since it goes back a long way I assumed it was flakes of naturally occurring minerals that naturally cleave in sheets or planes like mica or feldspar. Turns out most glitter today is manufactured from non-degradable plastics. According to an article in National Geographic...
"...an outright ban on glitter is premature, given the lack of science on the subject. ... the continuing accumulation of microplastics in the seas can only cause more harm to marine life, ... more effective remedies could be regulatory measures or manufacturers acting on their own." -- https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...vironment-spd/
Not exactly about climate change, but it is related to the environment and certainly relevant to guys attracted to girls who wear glitter.
Hmm, so I should feel guilty when I go to a strip club but not bc of the naked ladies I'm paying to watch dance? I refuse. But it is interesting:DQuote:
Originally Posted by trish
I'm gonna ask them if they know how bad glitter is for the environment and whether they've considered any biodegradable substitutes. Probably worth a slap.
Hey commies! Knock yourself off and gizza name of a crappy private school or two... Oh sorry. You are advocating censorshit..ekhm correctness political. Or maybe you just do not have any schools in mind cos you are just writing bullshit as usual, trying to enlarge your penises that way... I do have one shit school that I took a course at here in the UK - Mango Spice. I would advise any interpreters who wish to obtain the DPSI to spend their money and time elsewhere... Now, I do admit there are flaws in private sector. There will always be some shit schools, and companies of other type, but in contrast to shit public schools, the shit private schools close down as nobody wants to send their kids to those schools. I actually tried to google Mango spice briefly, and it does not seem to exist any more (maybe there is hope for the UK). So in general, it still seems like private schools are better than public ones on average. I am wondering if you guys ever went to a school at all or were you just union-schooled socially in the brilliance of the mighty hammer and the razor-sharp sickle.
I went to public elementary, middle and high school. I went to a private college and then private grad school. There are tons of good public universities and graduate schools. It was not something I even based my decision on. There are probably great private academies and whatever where people can get secondary school education (what we call high school) but it's not gonna be a choice for everybody. Remember, we're talking about privatization as a way of evaluating market systems and what kinds of regulations can prevent climate change so that's a much longer conversation and sort of its own topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
Would I seem like Joseph Stalin if I asked what connection you're making to the environment or do I have to read your entire conversation?
You should be able to find out for yourself the schools that fail OFSTED inspections, those that are top-rated, be they in the state or the private sector. It is not that difficult, just as it took me about five seconds to find the Mango Spice website.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
https://www.mslanguagesolutions.com/linguist-academy
Learning about the environment, in my opinion, is crucial to understanding a wide range of issues in politics, the economy and society, it can be approached with sufficient scientific content to enable students to make up their own minds on what the most pressing issues are -water, de-forestation, resource management, population growth and control, climate change etc.
And it seems that all that glitters is not gold. So we can stop mining the stuff.
Lol, does this incoherent stream of consciousness (even by your usual standards) have any connection to this thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
Were you under the influence of alcohol or drugs when you wrote this? Your inability to do a simple google search (which also took me seconds) seems to point in that direction.
In fairness I got a bunch of Indian restaurants until I happened upon the genius idea to add the word language or the city it's in or the fact that it's a school or the certification it offers or just about anything related to it. Probably my public school education. I wasn't sure where the discussion of education came up; I assumed it had to do with a discussion of whether an unregulated market provides better services than one that includes subsidies by the state. If she is implying that you cannot get a good education in public schools and universities or that they're propaganda mills, I think Stavros had her covered.Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
If she has any concern about the state of public universities in the states she can maybe go through this list. With some diligence, she might find some of the best scholars in this country. I can't even imagine someone complaining about the quality of education from UCLA, UC Berkeley, or U Virginia. And look at the in-state tuition fees, which for people who do not come from super wealthy families provides a fantastic opportunity to get a great education at a manageable cost. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges...ies/top-public
As for the connection to this thread...well she could probably take courses on climate change and related disciplines at the above schools and would learn more than she would at this private school. https://www.bju.edu/
I offered a link to a survey published in the Huffington Post which argued that some private schools in the US are using materials from education boards that replace ideas based on science with ideas taken from scripture, and used an example relating to the environment. Comrade Vex, as usual, slotted the question of what is taught in schools into her ideological straight-jacket in which there is a simple either/or choice between the State and the Free Market, which had nothing to do with the environment or climate change as her posts reveal. Note also that we tend in the UK to use the words 'school' and 'University'/'College' separately, so my intention was to refer to schooling up to your highest level in the High School sector not in further or higher education, ie college and university.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
Public schools are shit because they teach pretty much the same stuff to everybody. You may say that this is good because it helps kids determine whether they have more talent for mathematics, biology, or other sciences... That is unnecessary. If someone is a genius then it will prolly show at some point in their life by means relativity theory of some sort - even if they end up working as clerk at a patent office. Also, if someone finds it necessary to learn to read or write, then they will most likely learn that too regardless of whether or not they attend a school.
How does public schooling affect global warming? - If you teach to kids the same bullshit, i.e. that breathing and burning things causes global warming, then most of them will believe it. - That's how. Stavros and his fellow comrades like the idea cos it will be easier to convince the kids, once they grow up, to pay breathing tax or make the give money to Stavros's nephew's windfarm project.
I am disappointed that mango-spice still exists.. Truly a waste of time and money my course was. Quite sociable peeps though. I actually passed the written part, which I had previously failed, recently (after not taking any of mango-spice's courses for two years). Maybe if I could retake the remaining part I had failed, after another year of recovering from the mango spice's course I would eventually pass it!
Oh, I must have been under influence of "Internet Neutrality" that I couldn't find their website. Looks like broncofan also was, before he was allowed to see what he was looking for.
As to big universities in the U.S. I hear that if you take all the professors from a single one of them you are likely to have more communists than in the whole Soviet Union. My university days are over and I am not interested in any courses at the moment, especially at a commie den in the USA, that puts gender equality before maintaining the "high" level of education: I actually had a glimpse at the list of US unis you provided. Most of the students, at least throughout the first three unis from the list, are female which indicates the level of education there must be average. Universities may only be available for the intelligent few percent of the society who are actually capable of understanding what is being taught there and using it later to develop new technologies, or make connections with people who can help with that etc. - There is nothing wrong with that. What is the point of making taxpayers of a given state to pay yearly the 30k USD for each idiot who wants to have use the MA by his name? Like I said earlier, if there is someone worthy amongst the poor, they will probably not even need a diploma to become successful in life and they will get sponsorship once they do - e.g. from the company that spots and employs them.
[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1809769]
How does public schooling affect global warming? - If you teach to kids the same bullshit, i.e. that breathing and burning things causes global warming, then most of them will believe it. - That's how. Stavros and his fellow comrades like the idea cos it will be easier to convince the kids, once they grow up, to pay breathing tax or make the give money to Stavros's nephew's windfarm project.
-But this is what I actually wrote, with a new emphasis in bold letters:
"Learning about the environment, in my opinion, is crucial to understanding a wide range of issues in politics, the economy and society, it can be approached with sufficient scientific content to enable students to make up their own minds on what the most pressing issues are -water, de-forestation, resource management, population growth and control, climate change etc."
As to big universities in the U.S. I hear that if you take all the professors from a single one of them you are likely to have more communists than in the whole Soviet Union.
-This is quite simply incredible. Over the last 30 years the Koch brothers alone have funded over 300 research units, lectureships and departments in US universities to create a distinct 'conservative' voice and agenda, and that is before you take into account the influence of Evangelical Christians and the Moral Majority who began infiltrating US academia in the 1970s. As usual, you assume a handful of academics who study history, literature and 'media studies' are all on the left, and while some are, many are not. This is just ignorance masquerading as fact.
The planet is our home, we should respect it. As I said above, we should as a basic right give students of all ages the tools to make their own decisions. You have not educated any of us in the science that proves the human element in climate change and global warming is a fraud. Education is not just a word, it is also a process.
I am wondering how many kids who "learned" or were indoctrinated at a public school would actually be able to tell you what other factors than greenhouse gases contribute to climate change. Never mind the factors, I doubt they would be able to name any greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Most of them would probably not know that there is any other carbon dioxide that causes global warming than the one humans produce. In other words, shit education is worse than none. - Total waste of time money and human resources. Human resources that could mine coal so that the really intelligent folks can keep their arses warm while developing a truly efficient way of making electricity without polluting environment too much. I bet that if you did not waste public money for sending morons to schools, we'd long have had fusion power all over the planet already, produced at private fusion plants no bigger than an average detached house, rather than being forced to wait for projects like JT60SA or ITER be completed (which are gonna be shit and probably long after technology will have become obsolete anyway).
[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1809790]
I am wondering how many kids who "learned" or were indoctrinated at a public school would actually be able to tell you what other factors than greenhouse gases contribute to climate change. Never mind the factors, I doubt they would be able to name any greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Most of them would probably not know that there is any other carbon dioxide that causes global warming than the one humans produce. In other words, shit education is worse than none. - Total waste of time money and human resources.
--Your pathetic ignorance of the curriculum in English schools is matched by your cynical ploy of denying they even receive an education, being either 'learned' in puzzling apostrophes or 'indoctrinated' as you call it. This renders your reaction to my earlier point about the role played by education in developing a diverse understanding of climate change redundant. But I don't think you take it seriously anyway.
I bet that if you did not waste public money for sending morons to schools
-If you want to be taken seriously, and I wonder if you even take yourself seriously with this kind of remark, ask yourself where my GP was educated and why do I trust him so much? He was educated in schools not far from where I live, and has given me medicine that has quite literally changed my life for the better. And guess what, he is not a moron.
You ridicule voters as idiots, and democracy as a threat to human freedom. I have met and debated with libertarians before, but you are carving out for yourself a most particular niche, but that is your choice, even if it makes you look strange and isolated behind your wall of impotent rage.
For the record, the world we live in, even with its plenitude of violence, hate and suffering, is actually a kinder, and more gentler place than you find it.
Most universities offer courses at all levels in geology, paleontology, meteorology, thermodynamics, atmospheric physics and chemistry, climatology and other Earth sciences wherein one learns how the Earth’s precession, it’s encounters with asteroids, continental drift, vulcanism, core temperature, solar activity, photosynthesis, cloud cover and the chemical composition of the atmosphere have effected in past eons and will continue to effect into the future the stability of the Earth’s daily energy balance over time; i.e. climate change. In the U.S. public schools there are Earth Science classes that touch upon most of these topics.Quote:
I am wondering how many kids who "learned" or were indoctrinated at a public school would actually be able to tell you what other factors than greenhouse gases contribute to climate change.
I don’t know if you ever taken many science classes. It sounds as if you haven’t; or if you had your experience is not typical. A good science course will (and there are quite a few good ones in public funded schools and universities the U.S., Britain and Europe - as we train quite a number of engineers and researchers from around the world) hone the student’s critical thinking, creativity, hypothesis testing, lab technique and mathematical skills.
Unlike the predictions of ideology, those of science are used to prune, redirect or eliminate competing hypothesis when they do not stack up against the repeated results of tests and observation. Science does not deny the results of repeated observation (as do climate deniers, flat-Earthers, creationists and others of that ilk). Rather science seeks unveil reality.
RedVex seems to oscillate between two positions. ONE: Regulation is standing in the way of intelligent entrepreneurs who could solve the problem of climate change by giving us clean and efficient sources of energy or ways of using it. TWO: Climate change is a hoax by communists who want to regulate industry.
I don’t know about ONE. I will admit that the function of some regulation isn’t to advance the progress of engineering design so much as it is to protect people from abuse and exploitation. However, TWO is a clear example of denying the evidence to save an ideological perspective.
Firstly, I am not denying that climate is changing. I am convinced, however, that the global warming caused by CO2 produced by humans is being blown out of proportion by communists, bandits, mafias, who want to exploit general public's lack of knowledge and ability to interpret information they are bombarded with by mainstream mass media. I also believe that such approach of those communists causes regression in our civilisation's development.
Secondly, by "most universities offer (...)" are you trying to say that there are universities, universities, that do not offer "Earth sciences" courses that teach about causes of global warming other than CO2 produced by humans? "Most" is a rather vague term isn't it?
I am not oscillating between the two positions. I take both of them.
I know that you are in favour of equality, Stavros, but come on.. Kids can learn or be indoctrinated, and they can be taught or indoctrinated rather then "be learned". For a communist who knows all the fancy words, like yourself, you ought to know that, especially when ranting about my "weird" 66es and 99s, about which I guess you will just have to be a bit more tolerant and equal rights lol... I failed my exam anyway so I don't really care. Most people know what I mean. I also reckon double quotation marks are a good way not to confuse the Brits who already find it difficult to use an apostrophe in correctly.
If voters vote for higher taxes then they must be idiots or have no idea of how taxes propagate down onto consumers. Either way, democracy is an absurd system that divides societies and nations before our very eyes. It will be the main cause of our civilisation's demise, I'm afraid.
Then you deny the science and the only reason you can give is that the scientific findings somehow fly in the face your faith in an outdated ideology.Quote:
I am not denying that climate is changing. I am convinced, however, that the global warming caused by CO2 produced by humans is being blown out of proportion by communists, bandits, mafias, who want to exploit general public's lack of knowledge and ability to interpret information they are bombarded with by mainstream mass media.
[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1809916]
Firstly, I am not denying that climate is changing. I am convinced, however, that the global warming caused by CO2 produced by humans is being blown out of proportion by communists, bandits, mafias, who want to exploit general public's lack of knowledge and ability to interpret information they are bombarded with by mainstream mass media. I also believe that such approach of those communists causes regression in our civilisation's development.
--The typical excuse of someone who cannot, or will not engage with the science: 'climate is not static, therefore it is always in flux' -That is not, and never has been an element in the science of climate change. To dismiss the science as the work of communists, bandits, mafias, robs the argument of any shred of intelligence.
Secondly, by "most universities offer (...)" are you trying to say that there are universities, universities, that do not offer "Earth sciences" courses that teach about causes of global warming other than CO2 produced by humans? "Most" is a rather vague term isn't it?
--I cannot answer for the USA although famously, the University of Chicago dismantled its Geography department in the 1980s. In the UK there are universities that do not have departments teaching geography, environmental sciences or related studies. I am not sure if this is an important point anyway as there are plenty of institutions with high reputations that do teach and research the subject.
I know that you are in favour of equality, Stavros, but come on.. Kids can learn or be indoctrinated, and they can be taught or indoctrinated rather then "be learned". For a communist who knows all the fancy words, like yourself
--If I wanted to, I could be insulted at the way you choose what it is that I believe, regardless of what I think and say, indeed basing your presumptions on your own, rather than my ideas.
I am not insulted, just not surprised that having demolished your ridicule of the science curriculum in English schools your response is to avoid that specific issue -as if it were not important!- and attempt to make me the problem.
To say I know that you are in favour of equality, is a bold statement, given that I have not made my own position clear on something that has been controversial from the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle to the idea of Justice as Fairness in Rawls, the inherent contradictions in the concepts of liberty and equality in Hayek and Nozick, or the brilliant if difficult argument in Dworkin's Taking Rights Seriously. You can survey the arguments here, if you are interested-
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equality/
In a tangential manner, the issue of what equality is or might be, is related to climate change because in the disquisition of the subject, we note the tensions between equality as an ideal condition, and inequality as a condition of life, even though we appear to be either unable to explain inequalities in the conditions of life, or reluctant to do so because it may expose the extent to which inequality is un-natural and created by some men to benefit more from life than others.
Thus, even if you believe that an equality of opportunity should shape the way in which politics offers people from all levels of society that opportunity to improve their lives -something as a libertarian individualist you must surely agree on- it must also be the case that societies exist which prevent that equality of opportunity -that freedom to live- from being realised because the people concerned live in so deprived a region of, say, the USA, that there is little or no formal education that, through the transmission of reading and writing skills equips citizens with the basic tools required to be equal at any level, other than the biological.
To be born Black in some parts of the USA is thus to be born into a social milieu which by definition deems Black people utterly incapable of doing anything that 'comes naturally' to white folks, hence there is no need to educate them. The result being a structural inequality that condemns one part of society to a life of poverty, in practice repudiating the ideology of personal freedom that you claim is superior to all other forms of social organization. Consider yourself blessed that your were not born Black in either rural Alabama or Louisiana.
By denying 'equality' any value, without even debating the complexity of its political sociology or geography, you expose yourself as a hypocrite that trumpets individual freedom even as you appear to support a political system that denies it, that grabs it by the throat and strangles it, or, historically, has lynched it to a tree.
The trees encountered on a country stroll
reveal a lot about that country's soul
I forgot to add the important point that poor -and thus in relation to rich, unequal- societies are at a disadvantage when it comes to those actions that they might be able to take to combat the worst effects of human-induced global warming, because they often find themselves at the wrong end of a process that began thousands of miles away in societies much richer than their own. We are all citizens of planet Earth, and must surely have collective responsibility for it based on the way we live.
Picasso said that "Art is the lie that tells the Truth"
OK, I'll buy that.
But Science is Science.
Trying to make Bullshit into an artform is just bullshit.
Unless you're in the manure business.
Nope, I believe in science. I also believe in ideologies that have proven to work in practice and I dismiss ideologies that have or have or have been failing.
It would indeed be nice if the pseudo scientists pushing global warming finally acknowledged that climate has never been static.
My bad. What I had meant to write was:
Secondly, by "most universities offer (...)" are you trying to say that there are universities, universities, that offer "Earth sciences" courses that do not teach about causes of global warming other than the CO2 produced by humans? "Most" is a rather vague term isn't it?
First you say that kids should have freedom - just like their parents - now you say that you are not for equality. Then you suggest you wanna give the same kind of education (although in a vague way by means of "a rounded and balanced education" for American children) to morons as is given to kids with average IQ and the bright, and then again you say you are not for equality. That is just an incoherent load of crap. You are clearly for the equality as it is understood by socialists.
As to you philosophical thought about tensions between equalities - yes equality is a very specific state, e.g. in maths, where 2 is only equal to 2 and is not equal to any other number. It can be described as some ideal state that rarely occurs in reality. Since maths is a language used for describing how the world works, it is more natural for things to be unequal than equal and any attempts to make things that are unequal equal usually ends up in a costly disaster.: Put a moron and a genius in a group of 30 pupils at school. The natural reaction of the group is that it starts pick on the moron and the genius. The teacher steps in trying to protect the moron as well as the genius, but that only works during school. Both of the exceptional kids will get picked on during breaks or after school as there will be nobody to protect them. If you have a group of students with equal IQ there will be no picking on one - another as they will be finishing their tasks in similar periods and therefore not get bored and get silly ideas. Same goes to coeducation, letting pupils not to wear school uniforms etc... Th applies to all domains, e.g. economy; not only in education.
Equal opportunity is another example of a socialist idea to create problems, just like the equality one: Because a moron is not equal to a genius, they automatically and naturally do not have equal opportunity to obtain a PhD. On the other hand, If the moron is big and strong, and the genius is small and weak, they also do not have equal opportunity to become a world-class weight lifter. Forcing a stron moron to think as hard as the genius is just as idiotic as forcing the weak genius lift as heavy weights as the strong. This is also why your socialist collectivism just does not work. People must be treated as individuals.
If I was born black in an unwelcoming region then I would probably try to move out of it at all cost rather than agitate my neighbours with equality bullshit, unless maybe I wanted to become a martyr.
Speaking of collective responsibility, do you mean the kind of responsibility the Roman soldiers would face all those centuries ago? - Decimation after a lost battle? Now, that sounds civilised... Maybe it would do well in case of the communists coming back from Brussels after a failed Brexit negotiation :dead:
Hey bronco:d I found something interesting about Berkeley that may help your imagination, since you mentioned that you "cannot imagine anyone complaining about quality of education it offers". This guy does not seem to be very happy about what is going on there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQF-cKFDivk
In maths there is the notion of an equivalence relation which happens to be the notion most appropriate to discussions about equality in moral, ethical and legal contexts. One among many examples of an equivalence relation is congruence modulo two in which all even numbers are ‘equal’ to each other and all odd numbers are ‘equal.’ When we apply the notion of equality to people we do not mean that Fred equals Fred and is equal to no other person in the same way that the number two equals two and to no other number. For example we might say, ‘Fred is equal to RedVex’ and mean they are equivalent under the law, regardless of their differences outside that context. Or we may mean they should be given equal opportunities where we have in mind some equivalent relation among economic opportunities rather than among people. As Stravros pointed out, the philosophical issue of equality among people is multifaceted and complex.Quote:
in maths, where 2 is only equal to 2 and is not equal to any other number.
Not necessarily. The ‘natural reaction’ of the group? To what? Being placed together in a classroom? The expectation is that no one will get picked on in the classroom. The expectation is that both the students and teacher achieve a rapport conducive to learning.Quote:
Put a moron and a genius in a group of 30 pupils at school. The natural reaction of the group is that it starts pick on the moron and the genius. The teacher steps in trying to protect the moron as well as the genius, but that only works during school. Both of the exceptional kids will get picked on during breaks or after school as there will be nobody to protect them.
Inside the classroom we do not expect all children to perform equally, we do not expect all children learn at the same rate, are interested in the same things, or at the exact same level of development. Some children require more of their teachers than others: the underachiever and the overachiever may be two examples - and generally teachers endeavor to give whatever attention is appropriate. Academically, not all persons, child or adult, are ‘equal.’ We do expect schools, teachers and staff to treat and respect all children equally as persons; and we expect children to learn to treat and respect each other equally as persons. At semester’s end the individual students, with guidance, choose are placed in new classes based upon their performance and their academic ambitions.
What happens outside the classroom? The teacher’s authority extends to the schoolyard gate and no further. But the content of what teachers, parents, family and community teach hopefully extends beyond. ‘That applies to all domains, e.g. economy; not only education.’
Yes, yes. Once again, two is equal to two and no other number. But two can be equivalent to three depending upon the mathematician’s choice of equivalence relation. Everyone should have the opportunity to find out, should they wish, whether or not they have what it takes to earn a Ph.D. This doesn’t mean we need to lower the entrance criteria to colleges and universities or that we must lower grading standards at public high schools.Quote:
Equal opportunity is another example of a socialist idea to create problems, just like the equality one: Because a moron is not equal to a genius, they automatically and naturally do not have equal opportunity to obtain a PhD.
Yes, the statement is somewhat vague but true: most universities offer courses - such as the ones I listed above - that delve into the past climate shifts and their various causes. Moreover, most public schools offer a course one might categorize as ‘Earth Science’ which touches upon the same topics. Any course that discusses the current exponential rise in global atmospheric and oceanographic temperatures will discuss past shifts in climates and their causes. The three factors that most insure this are: 1) it’s good science 2) it’s good pedagogy and 3) the current political situation demands it.Quote:
Secondly, by "most universities offer (...)" are you trying to say that there are universities, universities, that do not offer "Earth sciences" courses that teach about causes of global warming other than CO2 produced by humans? "Most" is a rather vague term isn't it?
No you don’t. You don’t even seem to know what science is and what makes the sciences distinct from ideologies and crackpot conspiracy.Quote:
Nope, I believe in science. I also believe in ideologies that have proven to work in practice and I dismiss ideologies that have or have or have been failing.
I don’t know if this says more about your moral character or your ignorance the human condition.Quote:
If I was born black in an unwelcoming region then I would probably try to move out of it at all cost rather than agitate my neighbours with equality bullshit, unless maybe I wanted to become a martyr.
[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1810057]
It would indeed be nice if the pseudo scientists pushing global warming finally acknowledged that climate has never been static.
--You dismiss scientists with years of experience as 'pseudo-scientists' for one reason, that you don't agree with them. This is the language of prejudice, not science.
First you say that kids should have freedom - just like their parents - now you say that you are not for equality.
--I do not recall making either of these two points.
Then you suggest you wanna give the same kind of education (although in a vague way by means of "a rounded and balanced education" for American children) to morons as is given to kids with average IQ and the bright, and then again you say you are not for equality.
--The mere fact that you dismiss some children as 'morons' reduces your comments on education to the status of junk, and one can only be relieved that you are nowhere near a classroom.
As to you philosophical thought about tensions between equalities - yes equality is a very specific state, e.g. in maths, where 2 is only equal to 2 and is not equal to any other number. It can be described as some ideal state that rarely occurs in reality. Since maths is a language used for describing how the world works, it is more natural for things to be unequal than equal and any attempts to make things that are unequal equal usually ends up in a costly disaster
--Maths is indeed a language, but like words, it only makes sense because the people who use it agree that 2 is 2, just as we can say 100 people understand the phrase 'this is a red ball' because they collectively agree that 'ball' and 'red' mean the same thing. Analysed further and it may be that no two people have the same understanding of what a ball is, or the colour red.
The equivalent problem in maths emerges when you measure the distance between 0 and 1, or 1 and 2, and what happens when you subdivide 1, because maths then disappears into an infinite sequence of numbers that expresses the dilemma of time and space as we understand it -rather than what it is. Mathematicians create formulas to allow things to function, and do it well, or cars would not run, and bridges not stand. But maths is not and never can be a perfect representation of the world because it cannot express infinity in reasonable language. Even Leibniz accepted this.
Put a moron and a genius in a group of 30 pupils at school..etc etc.
--This cynical rubbish not worthy of a reply.
Speaking of collective responsibility, do you mean the kind of responsibility the Roman soldiers would face all those centuries ago?
--No, and I think you know what I mean by it. You have a collective responsibility where you live not to throw your rubbish into the street but place it in a bin or a bag to be collected by the council -or would you prefer individuals to do what they like, and if that means throwing their garbage outside your door, then so be it?
Acting collectively, we can make a difference to the world we live in for the better. Again, think of planet Earth as your home, and ask yourself how you would like it to be, for yourself and your neighbours.
I took the following excerpt from the first part of the wikipedia page on Berkeley so I won't take any credit for my research effort. But you can choose to believe Milo Yiannopoulos, or you can actually look at the qualifications of their staff and the expectations they have of their students scholastically. In lieu of the excerpt I've included, you can simply read the entire wikipedia article. I think it speaks for itself but these things rarely do with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Univer...rnia,_Berkeley
Berkeley alumni, faculty and researchers include 94 Nobel laureates (including 34 alumni). They have also won 9 Wolf Prizes, 13 Fields Medals (including 3 alumni medalists), 23 Turing Awards (including 11 alumni awardees), 45 MacArthur Fellowships,[22] 20 Academy Awards, 14 Pulitzer Prizes[23] and 207 Olympic medals (117 gold, 51 silver and 39 bronze).[24] Faculty member J. R. Oppenheimer, the "father of the atomic bomb", led the Manhattan project to create the first atomic bomb. Nobel laureate Ernest Lawrence invented the cyclotron, based on which UC Berkeley scientists and researchers, along with Berkeley Lab, have discovered 16 chemical elements of the periodic table – more than any other university in the world.[25][26] Lawrence Livermore Lab also discovered or co-discovered six chemical elements (113 to 118).[27][28]
For 2017–18, the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) ranked Berkeley 5th in the world and 1st among public universities. Berkeley is also ranked 18th internationally among research universities in theTimes Higher Education World University Rankings, 6th in the 2017 Times Higher Education World Reputation Rankings.[29] It is additionally ranked 4th internationally (1st among public universities) by U.S. News & World Report.[30]
I would also add that the so-called 'Free Speech week' was a stunt organized by a student group -not the University- called the Berkeley Patriot that cancelled the event owing to the cost involved as well as the security issues that it had not properly thought about.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
Yiannopoulos who claimed 'libertarian' and conservative speakers like Steve Bannon and Ann Coulter would attend disregarded the wishes of Berkeley Patriot and claimed he would go ahead with a public rally even after the cancellation, but Bannon never committed to going, Coulter dropped out, and one seriously famous conservative thinker, Charles Murray said
“The inclusion of my name in the list of speakers was done without my knowledge or permission.” Murray added that he would never attend an event with Yiannopoulos “[b]ecause he is a despicable asshole.”
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...ek-uc-berkeley
Good old Monty Python has democracy covered as well :D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imhrDrE4-mI
They also covered the Republican form of government:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7tvauOJMHo
Interesting to note that the planet warmed up after each ice age all by itself without man....
Yes, the cycle of ice-ages (which includes the warm peaks in between the cold valleys) is due to the precession of the Earth's axis. There have been other climate and atmospheric events that were due to changes in the biosphere; e.g. the oxygenation of the atmosphere was caused by the evolution and massive spread of photosynthetic plants. The exponential jump in global surface temperatures since the industrial age is due to the massive dumping of once geologically sequestered greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere primarily via the global practice of burning fossil fuels.
I'll go with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
And I'll raise you one by saying the root cause is overpopulation.....as everything else is a secondary or tertiary effect of overpopulation
Don't believe it, then check out where most eggs come from for just one example....Need a 2nd, then look at the disappearance of the Brazil rainforest due to "expansion"....70% of our oxygen comes from rainforests.....
So what's your game plan for the root cause?