The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The language of the extreme > Comments

The language of the extreme : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 9/9/2014

Every now and then you pick up someone saying something so extreme that you wonder what on earth got into them.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. All
Jadrine K. Jardine,

"That assumes that the opponent's is motivated is to find out the truth, or at least to identify what's false, by rational discourse.

But what if they're not?

What if you can show that what they're saying is untrue, and self-contradictory, and fallacious, and unethical by their own standards, and violent?"

Leave them alone. Don't engage with those people.

All this is being discussed on the new Climate Etc. thread. http://judithcurry.com/2014/09/15/how-to-criticize-with-kindness/
Why not join in there. You'll get a lot more out of it than here. There are plenty of intelligent Aussies involved too (and UK, Canada, NZ, and various European's as well). They are far more knowledgeable then most of the inhabitants of OnlinOpinion. Of course it deteriorates from time to time too.

Don Aitkin posted this on his web site some months ago: "How (not) to argue"
http://donaitkin.com/how-not-to-argue/

The flow chart he linked to is interesting:
http://twentytwowords.com/a-flowchart-to-help-you-determine-if-youre-having-a-rational-discussion/
Posted by Peter Lang, Tuesday, 16 September 2014 10:47:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Poirot,

Not sure if what you say is on-topic, but I guess it's your best shot :)

Global warming: Is the pause continuing ? For how much longer ? Is the 'homogenisation' of data legitimate or not ? There does seem to be a case that it may not be.

Population: I try to assume that people are assets, not deficits. Some more so than others, of course, Poirot. But women with education seem to be the drivers of population control, along with compulsory, universal education generally.

Population reduction: yes, if it's handled in such a way that nobody has to be killed off, that people are able to live out the fullness of their years as life-conditions improve and to live longer, and that there are therefore more older people to be supported by working people; and that any reduction in birth-rates takes into account that those young people will grow up and have tov support the older population through their working lives.

So any population reduction program would have to be extremely careful not to cut back too quickly on the number of young people, i.e. on the birth-rate. Something like 0.01 % to 0.1 % p.a. reduction in birth-rates would mean, eventually, a reduction in the number of working people of 0.4 to 4 % every fifty years to work effectively, without putting any extra burden on the shoulders of either working people or older people.

Of course, that's after populations could be stabilised, which may take a century or two, depending on how long it will take to ensure that women universally get a good education.

So, starting, let's say, from about 2200, population may be halved from nine or ten billion, about every thousand years. That's not taking into account the multitude of technological advances every thousand years.

So pipe-dreams of a total population of five hundred million may take ten thousand years, IF future generations think it's worth doing.

But probably not in our lifetimes :)

Joe
www.firstsources.info
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 16 September 2014 4:20:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good contribution, Joe!
Posted by Don Aitkin, Tuesday, 16 September 2014 9:16:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'd missed Joe's comments. Apologies to Joe and to any other rational, pragmatic, realists I may unintentionally have grouped with the nutters.
Posted by Peter Lang, Tuesday, 16 September 2014 9:47:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
With regard to population, the Devil is in the Detail.
I would suggest treating global demography as homogenous is as misleading as suggesting anyone who disagrees with the hawks in the current American administration must “hate Americans” (Ron and Rand Paul for instance are spearheading a growing movement to bring ALL American troops home).
Japan currently anticipates a 50% reduction in population by the end of the century. Likewise, China -based on current fertility rates- could see a reduction from a peak of 1.44 billion around 2025 to 865 million by century's end. In Eastern Europe, some countries are declining by .8% a year. America's growth is around zero and predicted to fall -absent immigration.
Almost all the rapid population growth is occurring on the African continent. These stats. Clearly support the view that a high standard of living -including education and low infant mortality rates- is the best remedy for population growth.
All current projections indicate a quite rapid population decline within the next 2 centuries; more quickly if we can alleviate poverty in Africa, and convince women in these poorest countries -particularly Muslim women- of the advantages of birth control (In India only 36% of Muslim women practice modern birth control methods, compared to better than 50% for Hindus).
Compulsory education can have quite rapid effects on fertility rates even in this generation. In poor agrarian cultures children to work the land are an obvious asset, whereas keeping children at school can be a significant economic liability -as anyone who has children in this country would know.
As for Climate, although there has been a significant reduction in the rate of global atmospheric temperature increase in recent years, 9 out of the 10 hottest years on record have still occurred this century, during this so called 'pause'. The temperature of the oceans has continued to rise unabated. The mass warms the air more than the air warms the mass.
Posted by Grim, Wednesday, 17 September 2014 8:10:03 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Grim,

You're spot on with respect to over-population: see (but you probably know this stuff anyway) http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/01/world_population_may_actually_start_declining_not_exploding.html

As for warming seas, you might like to read my post today at www.donaitkin.com
Posted by Don Aitkin, Wednesday, 17 September 2014 9:27:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy