Future Generations Need Not Worry About Climate Change

ay anything explicit he will be shown up as totally ignorant, so he has dec ided that being unspecific lets him get away with being patronising when he doesn't actually have anything to offer.

ther transparent ploy, and shows him up a somebody who would like to be see n as sophisticated, but lacks the sophistication to carry it off.

And since you are less intelligent than I am , where does that put you.

Dan

to make it to adulthood, and the grandchildren will never be born.

an almost insignificant part of all the processes at play, most of which b elong to the domain of the life sciences, about which you know less than no thing (less than nothing implies no ability to comprehend or learn). The we ather patterns are indisputably trending, at rates 1E5 to 1E6 x anything th at could be considered natural, into zones of total inhabitability. The sat uration limits of all known earthly carbon sinks have been reached. You sho uld be noticing it now, and you will definitely being noticing it shortly.

Plant more trees and they will thrive

Maybe in the U.K., but you'd be the first I know of to suggest that the U.S. has a shortage of litigation.

You can argue small cases yourself in small claims court, for a small fee. For larger cases there are lawyers advertising on TV who'll take your case for free.

We all recognize that people stray, and some are dishonest. But 98-99% of society are honest. Societies can't survive unless most people do the right thing. It's a waste to burden all of them. Also foolish, and ineffective--they're not doing anything wrong.

To buy wine or beer you have to show ID in many (most?) states to prove you are at least 21 years of age. They insist for everyone, even if you're 80. That's an example of your thinking in action, in real life.

Cheers, James Arthur

say anything explicit he will be shown up as totally ignorant, so he has d ecided that being unspecific lets him get away with being patronising when he doesn't actually have anything to offer.

rather transparent ploy, and shows him up a somebody who would like to be s een as sophisticated, but lacks the sophistication to carry it off.

One of dear dim Dan's persistent delusions is that he is more intelligent t han I am. He got a high score on an IQ test once, and is too dim to realise that that this doesn't have a lot to do with real intelligence - he might even have a high enough score to join Mensa, while being dim enough to be i gnorant of the fact that Mensa is a club for people with high scores on IQ tests who don't show any other evidence of being clever.

is a particularly pathological example of the breed.

ng to make it to adulthood, and the grandchildren will never be born.

ng

be an almost insignificant part of all the processes at play, most of which belong to the domain of the life sciences, about which you know less than nothing (less than nothing implies no ability to comprehend or learn). The weather patterns are indisputably trending, at rates 1E5 to 1E6 x anything that could be considered natural, into zones of total inhabitability. The s aturation limits of all known earthly carbon sinks have been reached. You s hould be noticing it now, and you will definitely being noticing it shortly .

Only if it rains where you plant them.

This isn't guaranteed, even if it was wet when you planted the trees.

No, i'm saying money wasn't enough. They needed the LICENSE, and got it by serving up goods for the Church. The Church, in return, gave approval. There would have been no development of printing without servicing the Church interests.

Elsevier might have old records and could tell you about payments in the 16th or 17th century, if you want to know.

That's my observation too!

I always stayed well clear of Sinclair and his products.

We have both those as well. They are completely insufficient.

Some people only do the right thing because of the fear of being caught. If they don't think they will be caught, the punishment is not part of their decision.

Sociopaths (by some reckoning up to 10% of the population) are well represented in the upper ranks of companies where they can set policies that cause significant harm. They know they have little chance of being caught.

And that's why your commendable beliefs in the innate goodness of people is misplaced.

If you really believe that removing laws and restrictions will lead to an improved life (or whatever), then there are plenty of countries where that it possible because laws are not well enforced. You might be enlightened by visiting them and listening to people's stories.

It is 18 here, and the salespeople are /personally/ liable if they sell to underage customers. Nonetheless, they aren't quite that unthinking here.

es say anything explicit he will be shown up as totally ignorant, so he has decided that being unspecific lets him get away with being patronising whe n he doesn't actually have anything to offer.

I just do not think I have any reason to educate you. You should have lear ned how to find facts years ago.

than I am. He got a high score on an IQ test once, and is too dim to reali se that that this doesn't have a lot to do with real intelligence - he migh t even have a high enough score to join Mensa, while being dim enough to be ignorant of the fact that Mensa is a club for people with high scores on I Q tests who don't show any other evidence of being clever.

No delusion as all the readers of this news group know. And once again Bil l is wrong. I have consistently gotten high scores on IQ tests. And scor ed high enough to qualify to join the " Three nines society ".

Dan

I wouldn't sell laser drivers if I didn't serve my customers interest. And they certainly wouldn't pay me.

That's hilarious. Elsevier is just in it for the money.

Check this:

Gutenberg was a middle-ages Silicon Valley type hustler, all about schemes to make (or borrow) money. He did not start by printing bibles, but eventually figured out where the money was.

does say anything explicit he will be shown up as totally ignorant, so he h as decided that being unspecific lets him get away with being patronising w hen he doesn't actually have anything to offer.

arned how to find facts years ago.

You not only lack any motivation to educate me, but you also come up short on having the information to do it with.

u.

nt than I am. He got a high score on an IQ test once, and is too dim to rea lise that that this doesn't have a lot to do with real intelligence - he mi ght even have a high enough score to join Mensa, while being dim enough to be ignorant of the fact that Mensa is a club for people with high scores on IQ tests who don't show any other evidence of being clever.

Sure. Of course it isn't a delusion. Dan has told us so himself.

IQ tests. And scored high enough to qualify to join the " Three nines soc iety ".

Pity you can't cope with the imperfect correlation between high scores on I Q tests and real-world cleverness.

The point about IQ tests is that they are cheap, and the results are good e nough to be helpful.

The book "The Bell Curve"

claimed that while they weren't a particularly good predictor, they were th e best around. Sadly, the book was rubbish, though it got a lot of attentio n, and was subsequently demolished by

The Wikipedia write-up is brief and superficial. The part that impressed me was the demonstration that Herrnstein and Murray had made the IQ test resu lts look relatively good by lumping all the other social factors into a sin gle socioeconomic index.

Fischer et al separated the various social factors, and extracted correlati ons between each one and subsequent economic success. This approach explain ed a lot more of the variance in subsequent economic success, and reduced t he IQ test score to one of a number of factors, none of which - on it's own - had that much influence.

Something that Bill says, but has no way of knowing if it is true.

No delusion. Anyone can tell Bill is wrong by just reading what Bill posts.

And anyone can tell the truth by reading what Bill posts.

Sounds like sour grapes to me. You did not do all that well on IQ tests and did not do that well in the real world.

Dan

Sloman is barely one step above an Amoeba.

But who, in their right mind, would bother? Read one, you've read them all.

Sociopaths are even more highly represented in high government office, which is why your trust in same is excessive.

Excessively strict regulations can be enacted by politicians, for example, to favor large businesses and lock out small competitors (like the lady down the street who'd like to sell you some cupcakes she baked). It's for your own good, you see.

I've been to those countries personally. But there's an easier comparison right here at home--I haven't noticed any important difference in outcomes between states or cities on certain issues, where one place is overly strict, and another more lax.

The EU has had their horsemeat scandal, as an example, despite all the oversight. Even a police state can't stop cheating completely (and police states are often the places where cheaters thrive).

I'm particularly unimpressed that California's essentially outlawing home bakers and babysitters has done a damn thing positive.

Obviously no one thinks selling adulterated food is okay.

I believe what's missing from all this hand-waving idealism is the concept of degree. Should a baker have to fill out and file 20 pages of documents per loaf with tracking info and photos, plus monthly exams and health certificates? Not to mention all the non-baking requirements heaped on them?

Those do almost nothing to ensure quality or safety.

Having read a few regulations myself, I'm quite sure that nearly *none* of the people thoughtlessly spouting "regulation" as the fix have ever read even *one*, or would be able to understand one if they tried. Regulations are lengthy, complicated, mind-numbing documents written by government lawyers in legalese that borders on the indecipherable.

And they'll put you on the rack if you misinterpret one of their ambiguities (or if they misconstrue one of their own clear statements).

Cheers, James Arthur

does say anything explicit he will be shown up as totally ignorant, so he h as decided that being unspecific lets him get away with being patronising w hen he doesn't actually have anything to offer.

There's no need to. Bill's not ignorant, it's reality that's wrong.

Cheers, James Arthur

Bill is ignorant about the various levels and types of courts in the U.S.

Dan

Or two agencies, each with a mandate to regulate have contradictory regulations, putting the individual in a catch-22. It happened to restaurateur friend a while back. The local health department demanded lids on his kitchen garbage and the county forbade lids. He had to comply with both.

Then there's the whole issue of government mandated unions.

s say anything explicit he will be shown up as totally ignorant, so he has decided that being unspecific lets him get away with being patronising when he doesn't actually have anything to offer.

rather transparent ploy, and shows him up a somebody who would like to be seen as sophisticated, but lacks the sophistication to carry it off.

Mike Terrell is an ex-technician, and they don't have a very high opinion o f real engineers, who never know as much as they do about the fine detail o f the problems that need solving.