General > General Technical Chat
Was Don Lancaster really a "guru"?
<< < (29/39) > >>
rhb:
It's also not about Don Lancaster either.  It morphed into a discussion of critical thinking. 

I'm a geoscientist.  I'm hardly about to bother debating pure BS.     Experience quickly proves it's not useful.  Besides which, the usual response is a torrent of verbal abuse or worse.

My point was that  people  learn about the last ice age in the 5th grade, win a Nobel prize and still lack the clarity of thought to  recognize  human beings are not the cause of climate change demonstrates that critical thinking is commonly absent among people who should know better.  I presented  a logical proof called a "syllogism".

Actually, critical thinking has  probably always been a rare skill and always will be. 
T3sl4co1l:
Talking about "cognitive dissonance" isn't very convincing when you're suffering from it yourself...

Which works both ways, by the way.  You're not going to convince anyone, nor be convinced yourself, in the presence of it.

Tim
Tomorokoshi:
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
Tomorokoshi:
Anyway, I finally got a copy of the Active Filter Cookbook directly from his ebay shop. A new, signed copy!

I never was too aware of him before this thread actually, although somehow I suspect there may be a book of his in my collection somewhere, and it's likely I borrowed some material years ago from others.

There are a lot of nice publications on his site. Much to work through.
rhb:

--- Quote from: T3sl4co1l on February 11, 2019, 12:00:44 am ---Talking about "cognitive dissonance" isn't very convincing when you're suffering from it yourself...

Which works both ways, by the way.  You're not going to convince anyone, nor be convinced yourself, in the presence of it.

Tim

--- End quote ---

Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain my "cognitive dissonance"?  Which of my statements contradicts my other statements?

A mile thick sheet of ice doesn't melt in a few years, especially if the average temperature is only slightly above freezing for a few months each year. Have you ever taken a course in geology??  It would take several tractor trailer loads to collect all the literature just on the topic of the last ice age 15,000 years ago.  Never mind the rest of them.

Just because "journalists" claim that there is a "scientific consensus" that "anthropogenic climate change" is a serious threat means nothing.  All you have to do is make sure you only consult scientists who don't know geology.  I do not know a *single* geoscientist that believes any of this.  And most of the geoscientists I know (which is probably most of the people I know)  have PhDs from Stanford, Mines, Austin, Delft and other top rank schools.  So the scientific consensus among people who actually study geoscience is *exactly* the opposite of Michael Mann et al.

Go read AAPG Memoir 26, "Seismic Stratigraphy- applications to hydrocarbon exploration".  The publication of that memoir was a *major* embarrassment for Exxon's upper management when the significance of the work by Pete Vail et al sank in.  Prior to that no one outside of Vail's group realized that sea level has risen and fallen by hundreds of feet in the past and that this was evident and synchronous  worldwide.  Upper management wasn't interested in Pete's work, so they gave him permission to publish what proved to be some of the most important work in geology of the 70's.

Would you consider the consensus of a bunch of auto mechanics about a medical problem valid?  Maybe you should go to your auto mechanic for a diagnosis.

As for convincing ignorant people of the truth, as I remarked at the start, it's a complete waste of time.

As Adolf Hitler noted, if you repeat the same lies often enough and loudly enough, most people will believe it.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod